Public record
Software health reportschema 0.14.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 04:28 UTC

ArchiveBox / abx-dl

⬇️ A simple all-in-one CLI tool to download EVERYTHING from a URL (like youtube-dl/yt-dlp, forum-dl, gallery-dl, simpler ArchiveBox). 🎭 Uses headless Chrome to get HTML, JS, CSS, images/video/audio/subtitles, PDFs, screenshots, article text, git repos, and more...

PythonMIT★ 130 stars⑂ 7 forkssince Oct 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined
#archivebox#chrome#crawling#curl#downloader#gallery-dl#headless#internet-archiving#playwright#puppeteer#scraping#wget#youtube-dl#yt-dlp#cli-tool#cli#http-client#ai-scraping

ArchiveBox/abx-dl holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (86/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (51/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ArchiveBoxOrganization
496 followers23 public repossince Nov 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIabx-dl1.11.2389,1602920 days agoscrapingcrawlingdownloadinginternet-archivingweb-archivingdigipreswarcpreservationbackupsarchivingwebbookmarkspuppeteerbrowserdownload

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

86Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

76Good
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence — 18/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 619 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year619
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year18

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 37 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~3.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count37
latest_release_tagv1.11.238
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases3.8
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?

51Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

42Weak
How it's scored
34.2/60Stars — 130 stars
6.5/25Forks — 7 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars130
watchers3
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_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

66Good
How it's scored
52.8/80Monthly downloads — 9,160 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesabx-dl
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads9,160
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

28At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 84% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.842

Issue & PR responsiveness

53Moderate
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution — 50% of issues closed
25/30PR acceptance — 10/12 decided PRs merged
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_prs10
open_issues1
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

88Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
19.4/25Owner reach — 496 followers of ArchiveBox
21.3/25Track record — 23 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers496
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified—
owner_loginArchiveBox
public_repos23
account_age_days2,063
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 pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 292 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesabx-dl
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

85Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

92Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://abx-dl.archivebox.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 18 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsarchivebox, chrome, crawling, curl, downloader, gallery-dl, headless, internet-archiving, playwright, puppeteer, scraping, wget, youtube-dl, yt-dlp, cli-tool, cli, http-client, ai-scraping
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://abx-dl.archivebox.io
docs_sitehttps://abx-dl.archivebox.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

52Moderate
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
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

75Good
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes3,114
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

52Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

52Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
51.7/55Manageable file sizes — 2/33 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes118,567
source_files_sampled33
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

130GitHub stars
4contributors
619commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
37releases
1bus factor
1open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 04:28 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
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmabxbus^2.5.4abx_dl/package.json
npmpuppeteer^23.10.1abx_dl/package.json
npmpuppeteer-core^23.10.1abx_dl/package.json
npmsharp^0.33.5abx_dl/package.json
PyPIrich-click>=1.8.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrich>=13.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIabxbus==2.5.10pyproject.toml
PyPIabxpkg>=1.11.224pyproject.toml
PyPIabx-plugins>=1.11.224pyproject.toml
PyPIjambo>=0.1.7pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic>=2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic-settings>=2.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIplatformdirs>=4.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.28.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpsutil>=7.2.1pyproject.toml
All dependencies 101

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 25 direct and 76 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmabxbus^2.5.4direct
npmpuppeteer^23.10.1direct
npmpuppeteer-core^23.10.1direct
npmsharp^0.33.5direct
PyPIabx-plugins—direct
PyPIabx-plugins1.11.254direct
PyPIabxbus2.5.10direct
PyPIabxpkg—direct
PyPIabxpkg1.11.243direct
PyPIjambo—direct
PyPIjambo0.1.7direct
PyPIplatformdirs—direct
PyPIplatformdirs4.10.0direct
PyPIpsutil—direct
PyPIpsutil7.2.2direct
PyPIpydantic—direct
PyPIpydantic2.13.4direct
PyPIpydantic-settings—direct
PyPIpydantic-settings2.14.2direct
PyPIrequests—direct
PyPIrequests2.34.2direct
PyPIrich—direct
PyPIrich15.0.0direct
PyPIrich-click—direct
PyPIrich-click1.9.8direct
PyPIabx-dl1.11.237indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.7.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.6.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIblinker1.9.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.6.17indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.4.2indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIdnspython2.8.0indirect
PyPIemail-validator2.3.0indirect
PyPIexecnet2.1.2indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPIflake87.3.0indirect
PyPIflask—indirect
PyPIflask3.1.3indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIitsdangerous2.2.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPImypy2.3.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpdm-backend2.4.9indirect
PyPIpip26.1.2indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprek—indirect
PyPIprek0.4.9indirect
PyPIpycodestyle2.14.0indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.4indirect
PyPIpyflakes3.4.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpyright—indirect
PyPIpyright1.1.411indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest-codeblocks0.18.0indirect
PyPIpytest-github-actions-annotate-failures—indirect
PyPIpytest-github-actions-annotate-failures0.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest-httpserver—indirect
PyPIpytest-httpserver1.1.5indirect
PyPIpytest-sugar—indirect
PyPIpytest-sugar1.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout—indirect
PyPIpytest-timeout2.4.0indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist—indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist3.8.0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.2indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIruff—indirect
PyPIruff0.15.21indirect
PyPItermcolor3.3.0indirect
PyPIty—indirect
PyPIty0.0.59indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuuid70.1.0indirect
PyPIuv0.11.28indirect
PyPIwerkzeug3.1.8indirect
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 ArchiveBox/abx-dl. Read them side by side →

98apify/crawleeCrawlee—A web scraping and browser automation library for Node.js to build reliable crawlers. In JavaScript and TypeScript. Extract data for AI, LLMs, RAG, or GPTs. Download HTML, PDF, JPG, PNG, and other files from websites. Works with Puppeteer, Playwright, Cheerio, JSDOM, and raw HTTP. Both headful and headless mode. With proxy rotation.Exceptional98apify/crawlee-pythonCrawlee—A web scraping and browser automation library for Python to build reliable crawlers. Extract data for AI, LLMs, RAG, or GPTs. Download HTML, PDF, JPG, PNG, and other files from websites. Works with Parsel, BeautifulSoup, Playwright, and raw HTTP. Both headful and headless mode. With proxy rotation.Exceptional99puppeteer/puppeteerJavaScript API for Chrome and FirefoxExceptional98yt-dlp/yt-dlpA feature-rich command-line audio/video downloaderExceptional95MarketSquare/robotframework-browserRobot Framework Browser library powered by Playwright.Exceptional99microsoft/playwrightPlaywright is a framework for Web Testing and Automation. It allows testing Chromium, Firefox and WebKit with a single API. Exceptional

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 v0.14.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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