Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-12 18:18 UTC

5and2northwest / olivander

5&2 Northwest application chassis

JavaScript · Ruby · HamlMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

5and2northwest/olivander holds a health index of 22 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (39/100) and lowest on Vitality (22/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

22
overall / 100
At Risk

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

22
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 32 is calibrated to 26 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

5&2 NorthwestOrganization
0 followers2 public repossince Dec 2020

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsfive-two-nw-olivander1.0.0.3-1170 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

22At Risk · 21% of overall

Development activity

36Weak
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year0

Release discipline

1Critical
How it's scored
0/27Ships releases — no releases published
0/36Release recency — no releases
0/27Release cadence — no releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

34At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

63Moderate
How it's scored
50.3/80Total downloads — 68,538 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfive-two-nw-olivander
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads68,538
monthly_downloads—
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

39Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

15Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 97% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.968

Issue & PR responsiveness

1Critical
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
0/30PR acceptance — no decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

56Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
0/25Owner reach — 0 followers of 5and2northwest
14.7/25Track record — 2 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers0
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_login5and2northwest
public_repos2
account_age_days2,052
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 117 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfive-two-nw-olivander
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

38Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

30At Risk
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

25At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

16Critical
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 95 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate1.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

60Moderate
How it's scored
14.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: devise 4.8.1 (moderate 6.1), view_component 3.3.0 (moderate 6.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
30.4/40No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 950 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories96
affected_packages19
assessed_packages82
unassessed_packages9
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 9, moderate 7, low 2
direct_affected_packages2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 82 resolved dependencies against OSV. 9 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

26At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
1.1/40Legible commit history — 2 of 93 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.022
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

36Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 93
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

48Weak
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
48.5/55Manageable file sizes — 10/84 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes254,921
source_files_sampled84
oversized_source_files10

Key facts

0GitHub stars
2contributors
0commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 1.6 / 10
1.6aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-08-12 18:17 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities95 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
RubyGemspg—Gemfile
RubyGemssprockets-rails—Gemfile
RubyGemschartkick—Gemfile
RubyGemsdevise—Gemfile
RubyGemseffective_datatables—Gemfile
RubyGemshaml-rails~> 2.0Gemfile
RubyGemsnet-http—Gemfile
RubyGemssimple_form—Gemfile
RubyGemsview_component—Gemfile
All dependencies 91

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 16 direct and 75 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemschartkick—direct
RubyGemschartkick5.0.2direct
RubyGemsdevise—direct
RubyGemsdevise4.8.1direct
RubyGemseffective_datatables—direct
RubyGemseffective_datatables4.17.3direct
RubyGemshaml-rails—direct
RubyGemshaml-rails2.1.0direct
RubyGemsnet-http—direct
RubyGemsnet-http0.3.2direct
RubyGemspg1.5.3direct
RubyGemssimple_form—direct
RubyGemssimple_form5.2.0direct
RubyGemssprockets-rails3.4.2direct
RubyGemsview_component—direct
RubyGemsview_component3.3.0direct
RubyGemsactioncable7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactionmailbox7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactionmailer7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactionpack7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactiontext7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactionview7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactivejob7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactivestorage7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsautoprefixer-rails10.4.13.0indirect
RubyGemsbcrypt3.1.18indirect
RubyGemsbootstrap4.6.2indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.2.4indirect
RubyGemsbyebug11.1.3indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.3indirect
RubyGemscoffee-rails5.0.0indirect
RubyGemscoffee-script2.4.1indirect
RubyGemscoffee-script-source1.12.2indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.2.2indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemsdate3.3.3indirect
RubyGemseffective_bootstrap1.14.6indirect
RubyGemseffective_resources—indirect
RubyGemseffective_resources2.8.5indirect
RubyGemserubi1.12.0indirect
RubyGemsexecjs2.8.1indirect
RubyGemsffi1.15.5indirect
RubyGemsglobalid1.1.0indirect
RubyGemshaml6.1.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.1indirect
RubyGemsinline_svg1.9.0indirect
RubyGemsjquery-rails4.6.0indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.21.3indirect
RubyGemsmail2.8.1indirect
RubyGemsmarcel1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source1.0.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.2indirect
RubyGemsmini_portile22.8.2indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.18.1indirect
RubyGemsnet-imap0.3.6indirect
RubyGemsnet-pop0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-protocol0.2.1indirect
RubyGemsnet-smtp0.3.3indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.5.9indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsorm_adapter0.5.0indirect
RubyGemspopper_js1.16.1indirect
RubyGemspry0.14.2indirect
RubyGemspry-byebug3.10.1indirect
RubyGemspry-rails0.3.9indirect
RubyGemsracc1.7.1indirect
RubyGemsrack2.2.7indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrails—indirect
RubyGemsrails7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsrailties7.0.6indirect
RubyGemsrake13.0.6indirect
RubyGemsresponders3.1.0indirect
RubyGemssassc2.4.0indirect
RubyGemssassc-rails2.1.2indirect
RubyGemssprockets4.2.0indirect
RubyGemstemple0.10.2indirect
RubyGemsthor1.2.2indirect
RubyGemstilt2.2.0indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.4.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsuri0.12.2indirect
RubyGemswarden1.2.9indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-driver0.7.5indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-extensions0.1.5indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.6.8indirect
Dependency advisories 19

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 82 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 19 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct. 9 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activestorage7.0.6indirectcritical88.1.3.1
actionmailer7.0.6indirecthigh17.2.1.1
actionpack7.0.6indirecthigh58.0.0.1
actiontext7.0.6indirecthigh27.2.1.1
activesupport7.0.6indirecthigh48.1.2.1
concurrent-ruby1.2.2indirecthigh31.3.7
nokogiri1.15.2indirecthigh171.19.4
rack2.2.7indirecthigh253.2.6
uri0.12.2indirecthigh21.0.4
websocket-driver0.7.5indirecthigh40.8.2
devise4.8.1directmoderate25.0.4
view_component3.3.0directmoderate34.9.0
activerecord7.0.6indirectmoderate18.0.2.1
bcrypt3.1.18indirectmoderate13.1.22
loofah2.21.3indirectmoderate12.25.2
net-imap0.3.6indirectmoderate90.6.4.1
rails7.0.6indirectmoderate17.1.3.1
actionview7.0.6indirectlow18.1.2.1
rails-html-sanitizer1.6.0indirectlow61.7.1

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with 5and2northwest/olivander. Read them side by side →

100apache/arrowApache Arrow is the universal columnar format and multi-language toolbox for fast data interchange and in-memory analyticsExceptional99grpc/grpcC++ based gRPC (C++, Python, Ruby, Objective-C, PHP, C#)Exceptional99ruby/rubygemsLibrary packaging and distribution for Ruby.Exceptional99stripe/stripe-react-nativeReact Native library for Stripe.Exceptional99open-telemetry/opentelemetry-rubyOpenTelemetry Ruby API & SDK, and related gemsExceptional99newrelic/newrelic-ruby-agentNew Relic RPM Ruby AgentExceptional

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — RubyGems.