opentaxii
0.9.3 open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on opentaxii's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
Python implementation of TAXII server services for sharing cyber threat intelligence.
opentaxii-add-api-root --public --id <api-root-id>
curl -k https://server.example.com/taxii2/discovery
curl http://localhost:8000/healthcheck
basic_auth: true
username: admin
password: secret
domain = persistence_api.get_domain('service_id')
Summary
opentaxii is an open-source TAXII server, written in Python, that lets organizations share and receive cyber threat intelligence over the TAXII 1.1 and 2.1 protocols. It runs as a service, either installed from PyPI or launched via the provided Docker image, storing data in SQLite or another SQLAlchemy-supported database and configurable through CLI commands for setting up API roots, collections, and access permissions. It is aimed at threat-intelligence teams and the engineers who operate STIX/TAXIISTIX/TAXIISTIX is an OASIS-maintained JSON schema for expressing threat intelligence objects; TAXII is the companion HTTP protocol for exchanging them, giving cyber tools a vendor-neutral way to share indicators and threat data. feeds for their organization, rather than at analysts consuming intelligence directly. Its README notes compatibility with Cabby, the TAXII client library, and it comes from EclecticIQ, positioning it as core infrastructure for TAXII-based sharing rather than a competing product.
Python implementation of TAXII server services for sharing cyber threat intelligence.
How opentaxii helps
Which of my partners can pull our threat intelligence without us managing their credentials?
API roots and collections can be configured for public read access, so a feed can be exposed without provisioning an account for every consumer
Which feeds do outside organizations have permission to write into versus only read from?
access permissions are set per collection through the account and API root configuration, distinguishing public write from public read from restricted access
Can a partner running an older TAXII client still pull our feed?
serves both TAXII 1.1 and TAXII 2.1 from the same instance, so consumers on either version of the protocol can connect
Where is my shared threat intelligence actually stored, and can I query it directly?
content is persisted through a SQLAlchemy-backed database layer, defaulting to SQLite but usable with another supported database, so the underlying data is queryable outside the server itself
Did a change to our TAXII 2 setup silently stop returning unauthorized requests correctly?
the persistence and authorization layer raises proper unauthorized responses for TAXII 2 rather than failing with a generic server error
How many API roots and collections are actually configured on this server right now?
configuration is managed through CLI commands that set up and list API roots, collections, and their access permissions, giving a direct read of the current setup
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for opentaxii, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail opentaxii puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
16 entries
No entries match these filters.
- January 20261
- October 20221
- June 20222
- May 20224
- April 20221
- December 20211
- February 20191
- June 20181
- February 20171
- June 20161
- July 20151
- April 20151
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in eclecticiq/OpenTAXII, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 4 +3 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 1 +1 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 100% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 3.2 years issues closed, last 12 months
- Open backlog 8 of 146 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 8
- Contributors / month 0
- Commits / month 0
- Stars 215
- features 50%
- other 50%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.