Public record
Software health reportschema 0.18.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-21 08:51 UTC

GoogleCloudPlatform / cloud-foundation-fabric

End-to-end modular samples and landing zones toolkit for Terraform on GCP.

HCLApache-2.0★ 2,069 stars⑂ 1,246 forkssince May 2019View on GitHub ↗

GoogleCloudPlatform/cloud-foundation-fabric holds a health index of 96 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (100/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (70/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

96
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

96
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 84 is calibrated to 96 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

21,259 followers1,498 public repossince Nov 2012

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

100Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 4 days ago
36/36Commit cadence52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume822 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 18 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year822
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push4
active_weeks_last_year52

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 4 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~10.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv57.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases10.4
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?

84Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
53.8/60Stars2,069 stars
25/25Forks1,246 forks
10.7/15Watchers86 watchers
Inputs used
forks1,246
stars2,069
watchers86
growth_stateorganic
growth_factor_pct100
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

84Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 32% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.319
How it's scored
41.6/42Issue resolution99% of issues closed
26.5/30PR acceptance2,850/3,221 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 26/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs2,850
open_issues7
closed_issues710
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.99
closed_unmerged_prs371
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.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
25/25Owner reach21,259 followers of GoogleCloudPlatform
25/25Track record1,498 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers21,259
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginGoogleCloudPlatform
public_repos1,498
account_age_days4,995
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsterraform, google-cloud, gcp
has_wikino
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?

75Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-ReviewFound 26/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 18 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
3/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
3.5/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate6.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages2
assessed_packages132
unassessed_packages28
affected_by_severityhigh 2
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 132 resolved dependencies against OSV. 28 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.

70Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md, GEMINI.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, GEMINI.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes15,026
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
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.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeHCL without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/62 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageHCL
largest_source_bytes39,280
source_files_sampled62
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexample, examples, recipes
Inputs used
example_dirsexample, examples, recipes
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

2,069GitHub stars
100contributors
822commits, last 12 months
4days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
7open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

Star and fork history 2,069 ★ / 1,246 ⇿
2,069Stars
1,246Forks

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

04008001,2001,6002,0002,4002,0691,246252022-072024-072026-07

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.9 / 10
6.9aggregate

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 · 2026-07-21 08:51 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
10CI-Tests27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 26/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
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 18 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
6Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 6
7SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 7
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 160

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 160 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@babel/code-frame7.27.1indirect
npm@babel/helper-validator-identifier7.27.1indirect
npm@google-cloud/functions-framework5.0.2indirect
npm@types/body-parser1.19.6indirect
npm@types/connect3.4.38indirect
npm@types/express5.0.6indirect
npm@types/express-serve-static-core5.1.0indirect
npm@types/http-errors2.0.5indirect
npm@types/node25.0.3indirect
npm@types/normalize-package-data2.4.4indirect
npm@types/qs6.14.0indirect
npm@types/range-parser1.2.7indirect
npm@types/send1.2.1indirect
npm@types/serve-static2.2.0indirect
npmaccepts2.0.0indirect
npmajv8.18.0indirect
npmajv-formats2.1.1indirect
npmavailable-typed-arrays1.0.7indirect
npmbignumber.js9.3.1indirect
npmbody-parser2.3.0indirect
npmbytes3.1.2indirect
npmcall-bind1.0.8indirect
npmcall-bind-apply-helpers1.0.2indirect
npmcall-bound1.0.4indirect
npmcloudevents10.0.0indirect
npmcontent-disposition1.0.1indirect
npmcontent-type1.0.5indirect
npmcontent-type2.0.0indirect
npmcookie0.7.2indirect
npmcookie-signature1.2.2indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdefine-data-property1.1.4indirect
npmdepd2.0.0indirect
npmdunder-proto1.0.1indirect
npmee-first1.1.1indirect
npmencodeurl2.0.0indirect
npmes-define-property1.0.1indirect
npmes-errors1.3.0indirect
npmes-object-atoms1.1.1indirect
npmescape-html1.0.3indirect
npmetag1.8.1indirect
npmexpress5.2.1indirect
npmfast-deep-equal3.1.3indirect
npmfast-uri3.1.2indirect
npmfinalhandler2.1.1indirect
npmfind-up-simple1.0.1indirect
npmfor-each0.3.5indirect
npmforwarded0.2.0indirect
npmfresh2.0.0indirect
npmfunction-bind1.1.2indirect
npmgenerator-function2.0.1indirect
npmget-intrinsic1.3.0indirect
npmget-proto1.0.1indirect
npmgopd1.2.0indirect
npmhas-property-descriptors1.0.2indirect
npmhas-symbols1.1.0indirect
npmhas-tostringtag1.0.2indirect
npmhasown2.0.2indirect
npmhosted-git-info7.0.2indirect
npmhttp-errors2.0.1indirect
npmiconv-lite0.7.2indirect
npmindex-to-position1.1.0indirect
npminherits2.0.4indirect
npmipaddr.js1.9.1indirect
npmis-arguments1.2.0indirect
npmis-callable1.2.7indirect
npmis-generator-function1.1.2indirect
npmis-promise4.0.0indirect
npmis-regex1.2.1indirect
npmis-typed-array1.1.15indirect
npmjs-tokens4.0.0indirect
npmjson-bigint1.0.0indirect
npmjson-schema-traverse1.0.0indirect
npmlru-cache10.4.3indirect
npmmath-intrinsics1.1.0indirect
npmmedia-typer1.1.0indirect
npmmerge-descriptors2.0.0indirect
npmmime-db1.54.0indirect
npmmime-types3.0.2indirect
npmminimist1.2.8indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnegotiator1.0.0indirect
npmnormalize-package-data6.0.2indirect
npmobject-inspect1.13.4indirect
npmon-finished2.4.1indirect
npmonce1.4.0indirect
npmparse-json8.3.0indirect
npmparseurl1.3.3indirect
npmpath-to-regexp8.4.0indirect
npmpicocolors1.1.1indirect
npmpossible-typed-array-names1.1.0indirect
npmprocess0.11.10indirect
npmproxy-addr2.0.7indirect
npmqs6.15.2indirect
npmrange-parser1.2.1indirect
npmraw-body3.0.2indirect
npmread-package-up11.0.0indirect
npmread-pkg9.0.1indirect
npmrequire-from-string2.0.2indirect
npmrouter2.2.0indirect
npmsafe-regex-test1.1.0indirect
npmsafer-buffer2.1.2indirect
npmsemver7.7.2indirect
npmsend1.2.1indirect
npmserve-static2.2.1indirect
npmset-function-length1.2.2indirect
npmsetprototypeof1.2.0indirect
npmside-channel1.1.0indirect
npmside-channel-list1.0.0indirect
npmside-channel-map1.0.1indirect
npmside-channel-weakmap1.0.2indirect
npmspdx-correct3.2.0indirect
npmspdx-exceptions2.5.0indirect
npmspdx-expression-parse3.0.1indirect
npmspdx-license-ids3.0.21indirect
npmstatuses2.0.2indirect
npmtoidentifier1.0.1indirect
npmtype-fest4.41.0indirect
npmtype-is2.1.0indirect
npmundici-types7.16.0indirect
npmunicorn-magic0.1.0indirect
npmunpipe1.0.0indirect
npmutil0.12.5indirect
npmuuid8.3.2indirect
npmvalidate-npm-package-license3.0.4indirect
npmvary1.1.2indirect
npmwhich-typed-array1.1.19indirect
npmwrappy1.0.2indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup4indirect
PyPIclickindirect
PyPIclick8.1.3indirect
PyPIcloudpickleindirect
PyPIcloudpickle3.0.0indirect
PyPIghapiindirect
PyPIgoogle-adkindirect
PyPIgoogle-antigravityindirect
PyPIgoogle-authindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-aiplatformindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-dlpindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-loggingindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-pubsubindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-secret-managerindirect
PyPIgoogle-cloud-storageindirect
PyPIgoogle-genaiindirect
PyPIiso8601indirect
PyPIjinja2indirect
PyPIjsonschemaindirect
PyPIjwt1.3.1indirect
PyPImarkoindirect
PyPIpydanticindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
PyPIpytest-xdistindirect
PyPIpyyamlindirect
PyPIrequestsindirect
PyPIrequests2.33.0indirect
PyPIsecopsindirect
PyPItftestindirect
PyPIyamaleindirect
PyPIyamllintindirect
PyPIyapfindirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 132 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 28 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
click8.1.3indirecthigh18.3.3
uuid8.3.2indirecthigh113.0.1

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.

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 v0.18.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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