HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
ossf
best-practices-badge
Ruby2015–2025
ossf / best-practices-badge

best-practices-badge

🏆Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) Best Practices Badge (formerly Core Infrastructure Initiative (CII) Best Practices Badge)

10Distinct people
26Mentions
1Explicit recommenders
1.4KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

🏆Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) Best Practices Badge (formerly Core Infrastructure Initiative (CII) Best Practices Badge)

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

They're talking about a different kind of best practices, but I highly recommend taking a look at the Core Infrastructure Initiative's Best Practices Project [0], which was…

dankohn1 used a recommendation phrase. One indexed comment matches. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 9:28:18 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year26 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2015-10-10 09:04:16 UTC to 2025-05-22 15:23:45 UTC.

024682015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 1 submissions, 2 comments20152016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 7 mentions; 2 submissions, 5 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 8 mentions; 1 submissions, 7 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 0 submissions, 4 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20202021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC312
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC725
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC817
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC404
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

7 sources
This is great news! I lead the "CII Best Practices Badge" project for OSS projects - if you have an OSS project, and you meet certain requirements, you can get a badge. One criterion is that "The project sites (website, repository, and download URLs) MUST support HTTPS using TLS.": https://github.com/linuxfoundation/cii-best-practices-badge/... I think making GitLab pages part of the community edition will make it easier to meet this criterion. Congrats, and thanks!
In Bringing GitLab Pages to the Community Edition
Thoroughly agree that this is a human problem, but I think there are some amazing automated fixes for it, by incorporating code checkers into the continuous integration pipeline. Take a look at how the CII best practices badgeapp [0] uses pronto [1] to run rubocop [2] automatically for free via CircleCI [3] and surface those results via the Github Status API and email. The whole point is to avoid having to manually complain in a code review. Instead, code reviews become a much higher level exercise discussing proper APIs and code structuring, not sphaghetti issues. [0] https://github.com/linuxfoundation/cii-best-practices-badge/... [1] https://github.com/mmozuras/pronto [2] https://github.com/bbatsov/rubocop [3] https://circleci.com/
In What to Do When Your Colleague Creates Spaghetti Code
dankohn1¡Aug 28, 2016Recommendation phrase
They're talking about a different kind of best practices, but I highly recommend taking a look at the Core Infrastructure Initiative's Best Practices Project [0], which was created partially in response to the Heartbleed disaster. It's a list of 66 practices that all open source software, including scientific software, should be following. [0] https://github.com/linuxfoundation/cii-best-practices-badge/... (Disclosure: I'm a co-founder of the project. It's completely free and open source, and the online BadgeApp itself earns the best practices badge.)
In Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practices” (2014)

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.