Attestation Alternatives

Similar projects and alternatives to attestation

reactjs.org

69 9,124 9.8 TypeScript attestation VS reactjs.org

Discontinued The React documentation website [Moved to: https://github.com/reactjs/react.dev]
packj

38 614 7.2 Python attestation VS packj

Packj stops :zap: Solarwinds-, ESLint-, and PyTorch-like attacks by flagging malicious/vulnerable open-source dependencies ("weak links") in your software supply-chain
InfluxDB

www.influxdata.com featured

Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale. Get real-time insights from all types of time series data with InfluxDB. Ingest, query, and analyze billions of data points in real-time with unbounded cardinality.
slsa

35 1,424 8.5 Shell attestation VS slsa

Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts
git-secret

22 3,621 5.7 Shell attestation VS git-secret

:busts_in_silhouette: A bash-tool to store your private data inside a git repository.
swift-corelibs-foundation

17 5,189 8.7 Swift attestation VS swift-corelibs-foundation

The Foundation Project, providing core utilities, internationalization, and OS independence
gitsign

10 899 9.1 Go attestation VS gitsign

Keyless Git signing using Sigstore
fulcio

6 600 9.6 Go attestation VS fulcio

Sigstore OIDC PKI
SaaSHub

www.saashub.com featured

SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews. SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives
dsse

3 58 0.0 Jupyter Notebook attestation VS dsse

A specification for signing methods and formats used by Secure Systems Lab projects.
root-signing

1 75 9.5 Go attestation VS root-signing
malicious-software-packages-dataset

1 103 4.3 Python attestation VS malicious-software-packages-dataset

An open-source dataset of malicious software packages found in the wild, 100% vetted by humans.
gittuf

2 329 9.6 Go attestation VS gittuf

A security layer for Git repositories

NOTE: The number of mentions on this list indicates mentions on common posts plus user suggested alternatives. Hence, a higher number means a better attestation alternative or higher similarity.

Suggest an alternative to attestation

attestation reviews and mentions

Posts with mentions or reviews of attestation. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-10-24.

Gittuf – a security layer for Git using some concepts introduced by TUF
5 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 24 Oct 2023

It's multi-pronged and I imagine adopters may use a subset of features. Broadly, I think folks are going to be interested in a) branch/tag/reference protection rules, b) file protection rules (monorepo or otherwise, though monorepos do pose a very apt usecase for gittuf), and c) general key management for those who primarily care about Git signing.
For those who care about a and b, I think the work we want to do to support [in-toto attestations](https://github.com/in-toto/attestation) for [SLSA's upcoming source track](https://github.com/slsa-framework/slsa/issues/956) could be very interesting as well.
NPM Provenance Public Beta
5 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 19 Apr 2023
There is no “software supply chain”
3 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 19 Sep 2022

I have. I actually worked a few desks down from dpc when he was creating it and we talked about it at length. I felt then and now that it has good goals but a very limiting implementation in that it does not pursue a portable spec and instead anchors a very opinionated format to git, and github, instead of cryptographic keys held in hardware owned controlled by reviewers. I want to see the same keys that sign git commits also sign reviews, for instance.
I think for broad adoption a review system should ask essentially the same questions as crev, but store them in a format like in-toto including signatures by the reviewers created with a user choice of pgp smartcards, ssh keys, or webauthn devices. These reviews would be anchored to hashes of a particular state of a particular tree of code and not to any type of VCS or distribution system. Important code is distributed via Perforce, mercurial subversion, and tar files depending if we are talking about big corps, or linux distro building blocks. A good OSS review system should be also be usable by teams in their internal proprietary codebases too if we wish to see wide adoption. Even for OSS we may wish to share some reviews as standalone objects privately while security embargos are in place, etc. Proofs should also be verified standalone easily from local cache, when github is down, when original repos vanish, etc.
Something that meets these broader needs will make it easy for large orgs with very different internal setups to participate and play nice with other supply chain efforts by the OpenSSF using in-toto for reproducible builds, etc.
My experience tells me we need something much more ambitious than crev, but crev proved to me many people have real interest in this problem which I really thank dpc for.
The biggest blocker for starting this project is the human review spec settling in in-toto https://github.com/in-toto/attestation/issues/77
A note from our sponsor - SaaSHub
www.saashub.com | 1 May 2024

SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives Learn more →