Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-26 18:30 UTC

CybercentreCanada / howler-api

Howler's API. Howler is an application that allows analysts to triage hits and alerts. It provides a way for analysts to efficiently review and analyze alerts generated by different analytics and detections.

PythonMIT★ 5 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Nov 2023archivedView on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolNetwork servicehow this is determined

CybercentreCanada/howler-api holds a health index of 16 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (66/100) and lowest on Vitality (21/100). The repository is archived, so no further maintenance is expected.

16
overall / 100
Critical

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.

16
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 43 is calibrated to 39 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Canadian Centre for Cyber SecurityOrganization · verified domain
576 followers136 public repossince Oct 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIhowler-api4.0.10.14826,4963380 days agohowleralertinggccanadacse-cstcsecstcybercccs

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

21At Risk · 21% of overall

Development activity

1Critical
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 456 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project is archived
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share0.901
days_since_last_push456
active_weeks_last_year0

Release discipline

52Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 2 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 559 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~296.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tagv2.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release559
mean_days_between_releases296.9
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?

38Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

12Critical
How it's scored
9.8/60Stars — 5 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars5
watchers1
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)

64Moderate
How it's scored
50.8/80Monthly downloads — 6,496 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageshowler-api
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads6,496
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?

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

12Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.986

Issue & PR responsiveness

57Moderate
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
25.7/30PR acceptance — 12/14 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs12
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

95Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
19.9/25Owner reach — 576 followers of CybercentreCanada
25/25Track record — 136 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers576
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginCybercentreCanada
public_repos136
account_age_days2,520

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 — 338 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageshowler-api
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

50Moderate
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://cybercentrecanada.github.io/howler/developer/backend/
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://cybercentrecanada.github.io/howler/developer/backend/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

25At Risk
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 — 0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — project is archived
0/5Packaging — no data
1/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 69 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate2.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

2Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
2.2/40Legible commit history — 3 of 73 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.041
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

53Moderate
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .flake8, pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 81
8/8Automated maintenance — 8 of the last 81 commits are automated dependency updates
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespoetry.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.099

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
54.8/55Manageable file sizes — 1/226 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes101,928
source_files_sampled226
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

5GitHub stars
2contributors
0commits, last 12 months
456days since last push
2releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:howler-api@4.0.10.1482; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

12233312024-052024-062024-07
OpenSSF Scorecard 2.5 / 10
2.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-26 18:30 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject is archived
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities69 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 32
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIapscheduler3.10.4pyproject.toml
PyPIauthlib<1.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIazure-identity1.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPIazure-storage-blob12.14.1pyproject.toml
PyPIboto3^1.34.81pyproject.toml
PyPIchardet5.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIelastic-apm^6.22.0pyproject.toml
PyPIelasticsearch8.6.1pyproject.toml
PyPIflask2.2.5pyproject.toml
PyPIflask-caching2.0.2pyproject.toml
PyPIgevent23.9.1pyproject.toml
PyPIgunicorn20.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPInetifaces0.11.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging<25.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpasslib1.7.4pyproject.toml
PyPIprometheus-client0.17.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpyjwt2.6.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyroute2-core0.6.13pyproject.toml
PyPIpysftp0.2.9pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-baseconv1.2.2pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-datemath3.0.3pyproject.toml
PyPIpyyaml6.0.2pyproject.toml
PyPIredis4.5.4pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests2.31.0pyproject.toml
PyPIwsproto1.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIchevron0.14.0pyproject.toml
PyPItyping-extensions^4.12.2pyproject.toml
PyPIflasgger^0.9.7.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpysigma0.11.17pyproject.toml
PyPIpysigma-backend-elasticsearch^1.1.2pyproject.toml
PyPImergedeep^1.3.4pyproject.toml
PyPIvalidators^0.34.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 CybercentreCanada/howler-api. Read them side by side →

86CybercentreCanada/clueElevate your Security Operations Center's efficiency with Clue, the cutting-edge enrichment tool tailored for today's SOC demands.Excellent80CybercentreCanada/assemblyline-baseBase components for Assemblyline 4 (Datastore, ODM, Filestore, Remote Datatypes, utils function, etc...)Excellent78CybercentreCanada/assemblyline-uiWeb interface and APIs for Assemblyline 4Good77CybercentreCanada/assemblyline-v4-serviceBase service class from Assemblyline 4Good75CybercentreCanada/assemblyline-coreCore server components for Assemblyline 4 (Alerter, dispatcher, expiry, ingester, scaler, updater, ...)Good56CybercentreCanada/assemblyline-service-clientService client that interfaces with the API to fetch tasks and publish the result for a service in Assemblyline 4Moderate

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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