...
| Infrastructure (end of Cherry) | ||
| Criteria | Result / Proof point | |
|---|---|---|
| Identification | ||
What is the human-readable name of the project? | yes | O-RAN SC's Infrastructure RAN = Radio Access Network O-RAN = Open RAN SC = software community Infrastructure = Cloud based infrastructure |
What is a brief description of the project? | yes | The INF(infrastructure) project provides open source reference implementation of Edge Cloud infrastructure according to the O-RAN WG6 specification to be used with the other O-RAN OSC projects such as O-CU, O-DU and in the future potential O-RU to create a complete reference implementation of the different O-RAN use case scenarios as defined by O-RAN Alliance work groups. The work in the INF project will following “Open Collaboration”, “Open Design”, “Open Development” and “Open Source”. |
What is the URL for the project (as a whole)? | yes | Infrastructure Home |
What is the URL for the version control repository (it may be the same as the project URL)? | yes | Multiple repositories in Linux Foundation Gerrit: https://gerrit.o-ran-sc.org/r/admin/repos/ |
What programming language(s) are used to implement the project? | yes | Golang, Python |
What is the Common Platform Enumeration (CPE) name for the project (if it has one)? | no | No CPE |
Basic project website content | ||
| The project website MUST succinctly describe what the software does (what problem does it solve? | yes | Infrastructure Home |
| The project website MUST provide information on how to: obtain, provide feedback (as bug reports or enhancements), and contribute to the software. | yes | obtain: from gerrit repos or from the OSC releases: Releases bugs: Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) enhancements: Same JIRAS tool as for feature planning. contribute: See OSC guidelines: Project Developer Wiki |
| The information on how to contribute MUST explain the contribution process (e.g., are pull requests used?) (URL required) | yes | contribute: See OSC guidelines: Project Developer Wiki |
| The information on how to contribute SHOULD include the requirements for acceptable contributions (e.g., a reference to any required coding standard). (URL required) | no (fix-priority very-low) | not available. |
FLOSS license | ||
| What license(s) is the project released under? | yes | Apache 2.0 |
| The software produced by the project MUST be released as FLOSS. | yes | Apache 2.0 |
| It is SUGGESTED that any required license(s) for the software produced by the project be approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI). | yes | Apache 2.0 |
| The project MUST post the license(s) of its results in a standard location in their source repository. | yes | root dir of all repos included in the project |
| Documentation | ||
| The project MUST provide basic documentation for the software produced by the project. | yes | https://docs.o-ran-sc.org/en/latest/projects.html#infrastructure-inf and other documentation under: https://docs.o-ran-sc.org/en/latest/projects.html |
| The project MUST provide reference documentation that describes the external interface (both input and output) of the software produced by the project. | partial (fix-priority medium) | Could be better organized. |
| Other | ||
| The project sites (website, repository, and download URLs) MUST support HTTPS using TLS. | yes | All support the HTTPS |
| The project MUST have one or more mechanisms for discussion (including proposed changes and issues) that are searchable, allow messages and topics to be addressed by URL, enable new people to participate in some of the discussions, and do not require client-side installation of proprietary software. | yes | Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) |
| The project SHOULD provide documentation in English and be able to accept bug reports and comments about code in English. | yes | Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) |
Change Control (9 Points)
...
| Infrastructure (end of Cherry) | ||
| Criteria | Result / Proof point | |
|---|---|---|
Public version-controlled source repository | ||
The project MUST have a version-controlled source repository that is publicly readable and has a URL. | yes | Infrastructure Home |
The project's source repository MUST track what changes were made, who made the changes, and when the changes were made. | yes | Infrastructure Home |
To enable collaborative review, the project's source repository MUST include interim versions for review between releases; it MUST NOT include only final releases. | yes | Infrastructure Home |
It is SUGGESTED that common distributed version control software be used (e.g., git) for the project's source repository. | yes | Infrastructure Home |
Unique version numbering | ||
The project results MUST have a unique version identifier for each release intended to be used by users | yes | |
It is SUGGESTED that the Semantic Versioning (SemVer) format be used for releases. | yes | |
It is SUGGESTED that projects identify each release within their version control system. For example, it is SUGGESTED that those using git identify each release using git tags. | yes | named branches |
Release notes | ||
The project MUST provide, in each release, release notes that are a human-readable summary of major changes in that release to help users determine if they should upgrade and what the upgrade impact will be. The release notes MUST NOT be the raw output of a version control log (e.g., the "git log" command results are not release notes). Projects whose results are not intended for reuse in multiple locations (such as the software for a single website or service) AND employ continuous delivery MAY select "N/A". (URL required) | yes | https://docs.o-ran-sc.org/projects/o-ran-sc-pti-rtp/en/latest/release-notes.html |
The release notes MUST identify every publicly known vulnerability with a CVE assignment or similar that is fixed in each new release, unless users typically cannot practically update the software themselves. If there are no release notes or there have been no publicly known vulnerabilities, choose "not applicable" (N/A). | no (fix-priority low) | |
...
| Infrastructure (end of Cherry) | |||
| Criteria | Result / Proof point | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Bug-reporting process | |||
| The project MUST provide a process for users to submit bug reports (e.g., using an issue tracker or a mailing list). (URL required) | yes | Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) | |
| The project SHOULD use an issue tracker for tracking individual issues. | yes | Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) | |
| The project MUST acknowledge a majority of bug reports submitted in the last 2-12 months (inclusive); the response need not include a fix. | yes | TODO | |
| The project SHOULD respond to a majority (>50%) of enhancement requests in the last 2-12 months (inclusive). | yes | Tools (mailing list, JIRA, Gerrit) https://jira.o-ran-sc.org/projects/INF/issues TODO | |
| The project MUST have a publicly available archive for reports and responses for later searching. (URL required)no (fix-priority low) | yes | JIRA: https://jira.o-ran-sc.org/projects/INF/issues | |
Vulnerability report process | |||
| The project MUST publish the process for reporting vulnerabilities on the project site. (URL required)no (fix-priority low) | yes | INF CII Badge - Bugs/Reports/Vulnerabilities | |
If private vulnerability reports are supported, the project MUST include how to send the information in a way that is kept private. (URL required) Examples include a private defect report submitted on the web using HTTPS (TLS) or an email encrypted using OpenPGP. If vulnerability reports are always public (so there are never private vulnerability reports), choose "not applicable" (N/A). no (fix-priority low)N/A). | yes |
| |
The project's initial response time for any vulnerability report received in the last 6 months MUST be less than or equal to 14 days. If there have been no vulnerabilities reported in the last 6 months, choose "not applicable" (N/A). | no (fix-priority low) | ||
...
| Infrastructure (end of Cherry) | ||
| Criteria | Result / Proof point | |
|---|---|---|
Static code analysis | ||
| At least one static code analysis tool (beyond compiler warnings and "safe" language modes) MUST be applied to any proposed major production release of the software before its release, if there is at least one FLOSS tool that implements this criterion in the selected language. | yes | Sonar |
| It is SUGGESTED that at least one of the static analysis tools used for the static_analysis criterion include rules or approaches to look for common vulnerabilities in the analyzed language or environment. | partial (fix-priority medium) | TODO-check container build system |
| All medium and higher severity exploitable vulnerabilities discovered with static code analysis MUST be fixed in a timely way after they are confirmed. partial (fix-priority medium) | yes | All reports are acted upon continuously. |
| It is SUGGESTED that static source code analysis occur on every commit or at least daily. | partial (fix-priority high)yes | |
Dynamic code analysis | ||
| It is SUGGESTED that at least one dynamic analysis tool be applied to any proposed major production release of the software before its release. | yes | code coverage tool |
| It is SUGGESTED that if the software produced by the project includes software written using a memory-unsafe language (e.g., C or C++), then at least one dynamic tool (e.g., a fuzzer or web application scanner) be routinely used in combination with a mechanism to detect memory safety problems such as buffer overwrites. If the project does not produce software written in a memory-unsafe language, choose "not applicable" (N/A). | no (fix-priority low) | |
| It is SUGGESTED that the software produced by the project include many run-time assertions that are checked during dynamic analysis. | no (fix-priority low) | |
| All medium and higher severity exploitable vulnerabilities discovered with dynamic code analysis MUST be fixed in a timely way after they are confirmed. | yetno (fix-priority low) | Currently no exploitable vulnerabilities to our knowledge. If it has, will address it asap. |