# FerretDB/FerretDB — health index 34/100 (At Risk)

> Inspection of the public repository FerretDB/FerretDB by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/FerretDB/FerretDB
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/FerretDB/FerretDB
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/FerretDB/FerretDB/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/f/FerretDB/FerretDB.svg
- Inspected: 2026-08-27
- Methodology: metrics 2.10.0, report schema 0.34.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 21% | 51/100 | Moderate |
| Community & Adoption | 17% | 93/100 | Exceptional |
| Sustainability & Governance | 23% | 69/100 | Good |
| Engineering Quality | 19% | 79/100 | Good |
| Security | 16% | 30/100 | At Risk |
| AI Readiness | 4% | 75/100 | Good |

The weighted overall 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | A truly Open Source MongoDB alternative |
| Classification | network-service, library |
| Homepage | https://www.ferretdb.com |
| Primary language | Go |
| License | Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 11,057 |
| Forks | 486 |
| Created | 2021-10-30 |
| Last push | 2026-06-05 |
| Latest release | v2.7.0 |
| Commits (last year) | 32 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Topics | mongodb, mongo, mongodb-database, mongo-db, golang, postgresql, postgres, go, database, document, ferretdb, hacktoberfest |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| go | github.com/FerretDB/FerretDB/v2 | v2.7.0 | — |
| go | github.com/FerretDB/FerretDB | v1.24.2 | — |

## Vitality — 51/100 (Moderate)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 21% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 39/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | partial | 18 / 36 | last push 83 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 7.6 / 36 | 11/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | partial | 13.6 / 18 | 32 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | not met | 0 / 10 | 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |

### Release discipline — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 71 releases published |
| Release recency | partial | 16.2 / 36 | latest release 290 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~27.8 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 10 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | no human commit for 201 days, with nothing left unanswered; held at dormant by a release within the year |

## Community & Adoption — 93/100 (Exceptional)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 17% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 93/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | met | 60 / 60 | 11,057 stars |
| Forks | partial | 22.4 / 25 | 486 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 10.8 / 15 | 89 watchers |

### Community health — 92/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (Apache-2.0) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | met | 6.3 / 6.3 | — |

## Sustainability & Governance — 69/100 (Good)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 23% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 42/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 9.2 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 59% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 99 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 24 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 64/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 32.7 / 42 | 78% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 18.9 / 30 | 2395/3800 decided PRs merged |
| Newcomer PR acceptance | excluded | 0 / 13 | no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 4.5 / 15 | Found 10/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 89/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | met | 20 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 19 / 25 | 434 followers of FerretDB |
| Track record | partial | 20.3 / 25 | 30 public repos, account ~4 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 91/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 2 package(s) on go |
| Publish recency | partial | 26 / 35 | latest publish 290 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 66 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 79/100 (Good)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 19% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 88/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 12 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | .golangci.yml |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | met | 6.4 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | partial | 18 / 20 | 28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9 |

### Documentation — 65/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | not met | 0 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://www.ferretdb.com |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 12 topics |
| Wiki | not met | 0 / 10 | — |

## Security — 30/100 (At Risk)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 33/100 (At Risk)

High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier to Security posture and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 6.8 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | partial | 2.2 / 2.5 | 28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | partial | 2.2 / 7.5 | Found 10/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 24 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | not met | 0 / 10 | dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | met | 5 / 5 | project is fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |
| Packaging | met | 5 / 5 | packaging workflow detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | partial | 4.5 / 5 | security policy file detected |
| Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 75 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 18/100 (Critical)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 554 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 2.3 / 35 | 16 affected: github.com/jackc/pgx/v5 v5.8.0 (critical 9.8), github.com/modelcontextprotocol/go-sdk v0.2.0 (high 8.1), go.opentelemetry.io/otel v1.38.0 (high 7.5), +13 more |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | excluded | 0 / 25 | transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 11.3 / 40 | 16 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 206 days ago |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 75/100 (Good)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | partial | 75 / 100 | Russia: contributor_organization (1) |

## AI Readiness — 75/100 (Good)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight: agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but its absence must never gate the top of the scale (calibration saturates at raw 91, so 100/100 remains reachable with AI Readiness at zero).

### Agent context & guidance — 55/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | not met | 0 / 45 | no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | met | 15 / 15 | llms.txt served by the project website (https://tembo.io/llms.txt) |
| Legible commit history | met | 40 / 40 | 98 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 87/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | met | 18 / 18 | Taskfile.yml, build/certs/Makefile, build/ferretdb-bw/Makefile, build/ferretdb-bw/ferretdb/Makefile, build/ferretdb-bw/ferretdb_loader/Makefile, integration/Taskfile.yml, tools/Taskfile.yml |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | .golangci.yml |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | Go (statically typed) |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | met | 10 / 10 | 11 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| Automated maintenance | partial | 5 / 8 | dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |

### Code legibility for models — 99/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Go (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 54.3 / 55 | 6/443 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 60/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | internal/dataapi/api/openapi.json |
| MCP server | met | 20 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | not met | 0 / 40 | — |

## Collection warnings

- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
- Could not fetch go package 'ferretdb.com/website' from its registry

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt