Skip to content

Add UKSSCOP reference-ids and claims to OSPS-BR.yaml #428

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
SecurityCRob wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add UKSSCOP reference-ids and claims to OSPS-BR.yaml #428

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
a46e661
Add UKSSCOP reference IDs and claims
SecurityCRob Nov 18, 2025
2137bd6
Remove reference-id 'Claim 2.1.2' from entries
SecurityCRob Nov 25, 2025
8bd9626
Update OSPS-BR.yaml
SecurityCRob Nov 25, 2025
99b1f21
Update baseline/OSPS-BR.yaml
SecurityCRob Nov 25, 2025
7d89dd8
Merge branch 'main' into SecurityCRob-patch-4
SecurityCRob Nov 26, 2025
8d80db5
Add reference-id for Claim 3.4.2 in OSPS-BR.yaml
SecurityCRob Nov 26, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions baseline/OSPS-BR.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -57,6 +57,10 @@ controls:
- reference-id: CM-5
- reference-id: CM-7
- reference-id: SI-7
- reference-id: UKSSCOP
entries:
Copy link
Contributor

@funnelfiasco funnelfiasco Nov 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This feels a little tenuous, especially 2.1.2. I can certainly see an argument though, so I'll just leave this comment for now and see if anyone else weighs in. If not, I think we proceed as-is.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@SecurityCRob SecurityCRob Nov 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Claim 2.1.2 "Users of the build environment are required to authenticate on a regular basis." Is Partial coverage at best. A means of ensuring that actors & inputs are trusted to to periodically authenticate them.

Copy link
Contributor

@evankanderson evankanderson Nov 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this may be a distinction between commercial and OSS software -- in OSS, we expect that attackers can do a lot more in the build system than you would expect for commercial software. So this hardening is roughly because OSS doesn't enforce 2.1.6 "Users with access to the build environment are regularly reviewed to ensure they still have a legitimate need".

- reference-id: Claim 2.1.2
- reference-id: Claim 2.2.2
assessment-requirements:
- id: OSPS-BR-01.01
text: |
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -127,6 +131,11 @@ controls:
- reference-id: SA-15
- reference-id: SI-7
- reference-id: SR-4
- reference-id: UKSSCOP
entries:
- reference-id: Claim 1.1.4
- reference-id: Claim 3.1.1
- reference-id: Claim 3.4.2
assessment-requirements:
- id: OSPS-BR-02.01
text: |
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -204,6 +213,9 @@ controls:
entries:
- reference-id: AC-4
- reference-id: AC-4(21)
- reference-id: UKSSCOP
entries:
- reference-id: Claim 3.1.2
assessment-requirements:
- id: OSPS-BR-03.01
text: |
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -307,6 +319,11 @@ controls:
- reference-id: MA-8
- reference-id: SI-4
- reference-id: SI-5
- reference-id: UKSSCOP
entries:
- reference-id: Claim 1.1.4
- reference-id: Claim 2.2.3
- reference-id: Claim 3.1.1
Copy link
Contributor

@funnelfiasco funnelfiasco Nov 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't see the connection here. I read 3.1.1 as being about cryptographic hash validation.

assessment-requirements:
- id: OSPS-BR-04.01
text: |
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -387,6 +404,10 @@ controls:
- reference-id: RA-5
- reference-id: SA-15
- reference-id: SR-3
- reference-id: UKSSCOP
entries:
- reference-id: Claim 1.2.1
- reference-id: Claim 1.2.5
assessment-requirements:
- id: OSPS-BR-05.01
text: |
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -451,6 +472,10 @@ controls:
- reference-id: SA-15
- reference-id: SI-7
- reference-id: SI-7(14)
- reference-id: UKSSCOP
entries:
- reference-id: Claim 1.2.2
Copy link
Contributor

@funnelfiasco funnelfiasco Nov 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This control is more about output than input. 1.2.2 is about input, and 3.1.1 is output, so we should drop 1.2.2 here imo.

- reference-id: Claim 3.1.1
assessment-requirements:
- id: OSPS-BR-06.01
text: |
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -483,6 +508,10 @@ controls:
- reference-id: PW.1.2
- reference-id: PW.1.3
- reference-id: PW.5.1
- reference-id: UKSSCOP
entries:
- reference-id: Claim 1.4.3
- reference-id: Claim 1.4.5
assessment-requirements:
- id: OSPS-BR-07.01
text: |
Expand Down
Loading