Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-23 02:10 UTC

DataDog / libddprof

libddprof has been renamed to libdatadog and development has moved to https://github.com/datadog/libdatadog

RustApache-2.0★ 3 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Sep 2021archivedView on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

DataDog/libddprof holds a health index of 19 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (67/100) and lowest on Vitality (22/100). The repository is archived, so no further maintenance is expected.

19
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.

19
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 49 is calibrated to 48 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Datadog, Inc.Organization · verified domain
3,270 followers1,201 public repossince Aug 2010

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
crates.ioddcommonpoints to another repo — not scored0.0.041528 days ago
RubyGemslibddprof0.6.0.1.0-131559 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

1Critical
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 1,559 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_share1
days_since_last_push1,559
active_weeks_last_year0

Release discipline

54Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 9 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 1,584 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~16.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tagv0.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,584
mean_days_between_releases16.8

Community & Adoption

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

56Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

19Critical
How it's scored
4.9/60Stars — 3 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
14/15Watchers — 336 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars3
watchers336
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

77Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

84Excellent
How it's scored
66.9/80Total downloads — 2,719,885 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageslibddprof
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads2,719,885
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?

67Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

58Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 39% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 7 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.393

Issue & PR responsiveness

44Weak
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — 0% of issues closed
26.5/30PR acceptance — 53/60 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 26/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs53
open_issues2
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0
closed_unmerged_prs7
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,270 followers of DataDog
25/25Track record — 1,201 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,270
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginDataDog
public_repos1,201
account_age_days5,851

Package maintenance

69Good
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
4/35Publish recency — latest publish 1,559 days ago
20/20Version history — 13 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslibddprof
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,559

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

64Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

64Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.datadoghq.com/tracing/profiler/
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.datadoghq.com/tracing/profiler/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

32At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

32At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 27 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
6/7.5Code-Review — Found 26/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
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 — project is archived
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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 — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 21 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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.

66Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 48 of 56 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.857
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

67Good
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, ddcommon/Cargo.toml, ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 56
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, ddcommon/Cargo.toml, ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml, ddprof-ffi/Cargo.toml, ddprof-profiles/Cargo.toml, ddprof/Cargo.toml, ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/40 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes27,440
source_files_sampled40
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

80Excellent
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — ddprof-profiles/src/profile.proto
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesddprof-profiles/src/profile.proto
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

3GitHub stars
7contributors
0commits, last 12 months
1,559days since last push
9releases
2bus factor
2open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch crates package 'ddprof' from its registry
  • crates package 'ddcommon' points at a different repository (https://github.com/DataDog/libdatadog); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • Could not fetch crates package 'ddprof-ffi' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'ddtelemetry' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'ddprof-exporter' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'ddprof-profiles' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
5Releases

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.

111222212021-112022-012022-02
Major 0Minor 2Patch 0
OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-23 02:09 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
4Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 26/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject is archived
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities21 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 47
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iolazy_static1.4ddcommon/Cargo.toml
crates.ioregex1.5ddcommon/Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1.0ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iobytes1.0ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iochrono0.4ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures0.3ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iohttp0.2ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iohyper0.14ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.8ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-rustls0.23ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-util0.7.1ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iopercent-encoding2.1ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-core0.3.0ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-util0.3.0ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iomime_guess2.0ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iohttp-body0.4ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iopin-project1ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iorustls0.20.4ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iorustls-native-certs0.6ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iohyper-rustls0.23ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iohyper-multipart-rfc75780.7.0ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.ioddcommon—ddprof-exporter/Cargo.toml
crates.iochrono0.4ddprof-ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.ioddprof-exporter0.6.0ddprof-ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.ioddprof-profiles0.6.0ddprof-ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2ddprof-ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.iohyper0.14ddprof-ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-util0.7.1ddprof-ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.ioindexmap1.6ddprof-profiles/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2ddprof-profiles/Cargo.toml
crates.ioprost0.8ddprof-profiles/Cargo.toml
crates.ioux0.1ddprof-profiles/Cargo.toml
crates.ioddprof-exporter—ddprof/Cargo.toml
crates.ioddprof-profiles—ddprof/Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1.0ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.ioddcommon—ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures0.3ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.iohttp0.2ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.iolazy_static1.4ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.ioregex1ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.ioreqwest0.11.4ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.iosys-info0.9.0ddtelemetry/Cargo.toml
crates.iouuid0.8.2ddtelemetry/Cargo.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 DataDog/libddprof. Read them side by side →

98svix/svix-webhooksThe open source and enterprise-ready webhooks service 🦀Exceptional96apache/arrow-adbcDatabase connectivity API standard and libraries for Apache ArrowExceptional96Shopify/rubydexA high-performance static analysis toolkit for RubyExceptional100risingwavelabs/risingwaveEvent streaming platform for agentic AI. Continuously ingest, transform, and serve event streams in real time, at scale.Exceptional100wandb/wandbThe AI developer platform. Use Weights & Biases to train and fine-tune models, and manage models from experimentation to production.Exceptional100envoyproxy/envoyCloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxyExceptional

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 — crates.io, RubyGems.