Provide comprehensive identification and provenance information for the open-source component under evaluation. Accurate metadata is critical for legal traceability and risk assessment.
Component Name
Exact Version Number
Release Date of This Version
Primary Repository URL
Specific Commit Hash or Tag
Official Package Registry URL
Programming Language(s)
Supported Platforms & Architectures
Is this component actively maintained?
Date of Last Significant Commit or Release
Explain rationale for using unmaintained component and identify alternative support strategy
Project Age in Years
Number of Maintainers/Contributors
Project Maturity Classification
Stable/Production Ready
Beta/Pre-Release
Alpha/Experimental
Deprecated/Legacy
Brief Description of Component Functionality and Use Case
Does the component have a documented governance model or foundation affiliation?
Name of Governing Foundation or Entity
Estimated Weekly Download Count (from package registry)
Is commercial support or an enterprise version available?
Provider Name and Support Terms
Does the component include any bundled dependencies?
List all bundled dependencies and their versions
Direct Dependencies Requiring Separate Clearance
Dependency Name | Version Range | Already Cleared? | Clearance Reference ID | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | ||
1 | |||||
2 | |||||
3 | |||||
4 | |||||
5 | |||||
6 | |||||
7 | |||||
8 | |||||
9 | |||||
10 |
Is comprehensive documentation available?
Documentation URL
Explain how lack of documentation impacts integration risk
Attach SBOM (Software Bill of Materials) if available
Accurate license identification and copyleft analysis are mandatory for determining legal obligations, disclosure requirements, and compatibility with proprietary commercial products. Incomplete or inaccurate license data will result in automatic rejection.
Primary Declared License (SPDX Identifier)
Has the license been OSI or FSF approved?
Are there multiple or dual licensing scenarios?
Describe all available license options and conditions for each
Does the component contain code under different licenses?
Identify all sub-components, their licenses, and file paths
Copyleft Strength Classification
Permissive (e.g., MIT, BSD, Apache)
Weak Copyleft (e.g., LGPL, MPL, EPL)
Strong Copyleft (e.g., GPL, AGPL)
Not Applicable (Public Domain, CC0)
Is this license on the company's pre-approved permissive license list?
If not pre-approved, what is the recommended escalation path?
Request exception for this specific use case
Engage Legal for full license review
Reject component and seek alternative
Pending further analysis
Does the license include an explicit patent grant?
Summarize patent grant scope and any retaliation clauses
Assess patent litigation risk given lack of explicit grant
Does the license contain a 'attribution' or 'notice' requirement?
List all required notices, acknowledgments, or copyright statements that must be included in product documentation
Does the license impose trademark or branding restrictions?
Describe permitted and prohibited uses of project trademarks
Are there any known license conflicts with your product's existing dependencies?
Detail the conflicting licenses and specific compatibility issues identified
Has this specific component version been previously reviewed by Legal?
Previous Clearance Ticket/Reference Number
Is a commercial license or alternative licensing available for purchase?
Provide vendor details, pricing model, and terms of commercial license
License Risk Assessment Matrix
Very Low Risk | Low Risk | Moderate Risk | High Risk | Very High Risk | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
License clarity and unambiguity | |||||
Compatibility with proprietary code | |||||
Attribution complexity | |||||
Patent protection strength | |||||
Litigation history of license type |
Attach LICENSE file or legal text from repository
Security vulnerabilities in third-party components pose significant risks to enterprise products. Provide comprehensive security audit results. Incomplete security assessment will delay approval.
Have you scanned this component using an approved SAST tool?
SAST Tool Name and Version
Justify why SAST scanning was not performed and describe alternative security validation
Have you scanned this component using an approved SCA (Software Composition Analysis) tool?
SCA Tool Name and Database Version
Are there any known CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) for this version?
List all CVE IDs, severity scores, and exploitability assessment
Does the component have any unfixed HIGH or CRITICAL severity vulnerabilities?
Describe mitigation plan, timeline for fixes, and impact on product release
Known Security Vulnerabilities and Mitigation Status
CVE Identifier | Severity (CVSS Score) | Is Component Affected? | Fixed Version | Patch Available? | Mitigation Status | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | ||
1 | |||||||
2 | |||||||
3 | |||||||
4 | |||||||
5 | |||||||
6 | |||||||
7 | |||||||
8 | |||||||
9 | |||||||
10 |
Has the component been analyzed for supply chain security risks?
Which supply chain security aspects were verified?
Code signing verification
Maintainer identity validation
Build reproducibility
Dependency pinning integrity
Package integrity hash verification
Provenance attestation
Explain supply chain risk acceptance rationale
Does the component contain any cryptographic implementations?
Cryptographic Implementation Details
Uses FIPS 140-2/3 validated modules
Implements custom cryptography
Uses well-known standard libraries
Contains encryption export-controlled algorithms
Has the component been tested for malware or malicious code?
Anti-Malware Tool and Scan Date
Describe alternative malware detection approach
Does the project have a documented security policy and responsive security team?
Security Contact Email or PGP Key
Assess risk of uncoordinated vulnerability disclosure
Have secrets, credentials, or API keys been discovered in the codebase?
Describe secrets exposure incident and remediation actions taken
Overall Security Maturity Rating (1-5 scale)
Security Risk Factor Assessment
Code complexity and attack surface | |
Historical vulnerability density | |
Patch application velocity | |
Security testing coverage | |
Maintainer security responsiveness |
Attach SAST/SCA scan reports and SBOM
Evaluate how this open-source component will be integrated into commercial products and assess risks of proprietary IP exposure, competitive disadvantage, and long-term maintainability. This section determines business risk and strategic alignment.
Integration Architecture Model
Static Linking
Dynamic Linking
Source Code Inclusion
Service/Process Isolation
Network API Dependency (SaaS)
Containerized Microservice
Will you modify the original open-source code?
Describe modifications, their purpose, and estimated lines of code changed
Explain how you will maintain pristine upstream code and apply patches
Will the component be distributed to end customers?
Distribution Method
On-premise software installation
Embedded in hardware device
Source code delivery
Container image
Mobile application package
If not distributed, how is it deployed?
Internal SaaS platform only
Cloud service (single tenant)
Cloud service (multi-tenant)
Internal tool not customer-facing
Could this component become a critical dependency for core product functionality?
Explain business criticality and impact if component becomes unsupported
Does the component expose proprietary algorithms or business logic?
Describe potential proprietary IP leakage risk and mitigation strategy
Will customers have direct access to this component's API or source code?
Explain customer access scope and any support obligations
Could this component create a competitive differentiation risk?
Analyze how competitors could replicate features using the same component
Are there export control or sanctions compliance considerations?
Detail export control classification and restricted country implications
Does the component process personal data or impact data privacy?
Describe data flow and privacy impact assessment considerations
Business Justification for Component Selection
Alternative Solutions Evaluated
Alternative Name | License Type | Technical Fit (1-5) | Legal Risk (1-5) | Cost (if commercial) | Reason for Rejection | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | ||
1 | |||||||
2 | |||||||
3 | |||||||
4 | |||||||
5 | |||||||
6 | |||||||
7 | |||||||
8 | |||||||
9 | |||||||
10 |
Is there a documented plan for long-term maintenance and updates?
Maintenance Owner Team
Explain technical debt risk and contingency plan
Will this component require custom fork creation?
Justify fork necessity and describe upstream contribution strategy
Business & Strategic Risk Assessment
Very Low Risk | Low Risk | Medium Risk | High Risk | Critical Risk | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alignment with product roadmap | |||||
Vendor lock-in potential | |||||
Migration complexity if replacement needed | |||||
Supportability and debugging effort | |||||
Total cost of ownership impact |
Attach architecture diagram showing integration boundaries
Final risk assessment and executive approval section. All previous sections must be fully completed before submission. Incomplete forms will be returned without review.
Has the requestor completed all mandatory fields in Sections 1-4?
Has the component been reviewed in a Technical Architecture Review Board meeting?
Meeting Date and Minutes Reference
Explain why TARB review was bypassed and obtain CTO written exception
Has the Legal/IP team conducted preliminary license analysis?
Legal Review Ticket Number
WARNING: Submission without legal pre-review may result in significant delays. Proceed only if this is a pre-approved license category.
Executive Summary of Risks and Benefits
Overall Risk Sentiment Assessment
Legal/IP risk level | |
Cybersecurity risk level | |
Business continuity risk | |
Strategic alignment | |
Overall recommendation confidence |
Risk Mitigation Plan and Timeline
Risk Category | Mitigation Action | Owner | Target Date | Success Criteria | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | ||
1 | ||||||
2 | ||||||
3 | ||||||
4 | ||||||
5 | ||||||
6 | ||||||
7 | ||||||
8 | ||||||
9 | ||||||
10 |
Are there any identified showstopper issues blocking approval?
Describe showstopper issues and required resolution path
Has a rollback plan been documented if component approval is later rescinded?
Summarize rollback plan including timeline and resource requirements
Requestor Name
Requestor Department
Submission Timestamp
Requestor Digital Signature - I certify that all information provided is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge
Engineering Manager Name
Engineering Manager Approval - I endorse this request and confirm technical due diligence has been performed
Chief Technology Officer Name
CTO Clearance - I approve the technical and business risk acceptance for integration
Lead IP Counsel Name
Legal Clearance - I approve the license compliance and IP risk posture for this component
Final Approval Date
Clearance Reference ID (to be assigned by Legal)
Is conditional approval granted with mandatory follow-up reviews?
Conditional Approval Terms and Review Schedule
Condition | Review Date | Reviewer | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | ||
1 | ||||
2 | ||||
3 | ||||
4 | ||||
5 | ||||
6 | ||||
7 | ||||
8 | ||||
9 | ||||
10 |
IMPORTANT: This clearance is valid only for the specific version and use case documented. Any changes to version, integration method, or distribution model require resubmission of this form for re-approval.
To configure an element, select it on the form.