Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 19:12 UTC

Harry-zklcdc / go-proxy-bingai

用 Vue3 和 Go 搭建的微软 New Bing 演示站点,拥有一致的 UI 体验,支持 ChatGPT 提示词,支持 API 调用,国内可用。

HTML · JavaScriptMIT★ 4,015 stars⑂ 5,472 forkssince Jun 2023forkView on GitHub ↗
KindNetwork serviceWeb interfacehow this is determined

Harry-zklcdc/go-proxy-bingai holds a health index of 23 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (60/100) and lowest on Vitality (25/100). It was last updated 598 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

23
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

23
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 42 is calibrated to 38 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

zklcdcPersonal account
137 followers44 public repossince Aug 2016

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

25At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recencylast push 598 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push598
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases85 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 598 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~35.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count85
latest_release_tagnightly
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release598
mean_days_between_releases35.1

Community & Adoption

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

60Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
58.5/60Stars4,015 stars
25/25Forks5,472 forks
6.7/15Watchers17 watchers
Inputs used
forks5,472
stars4,015
watchers17
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges10
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

48Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
3.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 85% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth7 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.849
How it's scored
41/42Issue resolution98% of issues closed
3.2/30PR acceptance5/47 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 2/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs5
open_issues9
closed_issues384
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.977
closed_unmerged_prs42
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.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
15.4/25Owner reach137 followers of Harry-zklcdc
24/25Track record44 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers137
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginHarry-zklcdc
public_repos44
account_age_days3,684
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

44Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.eslintrc.cjs
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
0/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.b1ng.chat
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://www.b1ng.chat
docs_sitehttps://www.b1ng.chat
has_readmeno
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

32At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 2/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities43 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate2.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
16.8/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: github.com/refraction-networking/utls 1.6.6 (moderate 6.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
34.4/40No advisories left outstanding1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 514 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories69
affected_packages7
assessed_packages11
unassessed_packages35
affected_by_severitycritical 1, moderate 4, unknown 2
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 11 resolved dependencies against OSV. 35 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.

40Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
9.1/40Legible commit history17 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.17
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapTaskfile.yaml
0/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.eslintrc.cjs
11/11Static type checkingfrontend/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer, Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesTaskfile.yaml
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsfrontend/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codeHTML with type-check config (frontend/tsconfig.json)
50.3/55Manageable file sizes6/70 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageHTML
largest_source_bytes439,505
source_files_sampled70
oversized_source_files6

Key facts

4,015GitHub stars
7contributors
0commits, last 12 months
598days since last push
85releases
1bus factor
9open issues
Go, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Community profile unavailable

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 5,472 ⇿
0Stars
5,472Forks
1Releases

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.

4,0004,5005,0005,5005,472272024-072025-072026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.3 / 10
2.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 19:12 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 2/18 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
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
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Vulnerabilities43 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmnaive-ui^2.38.1frontend/package.json
npmpinia^2.0.36frontend/package.json
npmpinia-plugin-persistedstate^3.1.0frontend/package.json
npmvue^3.3.2frontend/package.json
npmvue-router^4.2.0frontend/package.json
Gogithub.com/Harry-zklcdc/bing-libv1.8.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/Harry-zklcdc/ms-authv1.1.6go.mod
Gogithub.com/andybalholm/brotliv1.1.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/refraction-networking/utlsv1.6.6go.mod
npm@ampproject/rollup-plugin-closure-compiler^0.27.0package.json
All dependencies 46

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 36 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/andybalholm/brotli1.1.0direct
Gogithub.com/harry-zklcdc/bing-lib1.8.0direct
Gogithub.com/harry-zklcdc/ms-auth1.1.6direct
Gogithub.com/refraction-networking/utls1.6.6direct
npm@ampproject/rollup-plugin-closure-compiler^0.27.0direct
npmnaive-ui^2.38.1direct
npmpinia^2.0.36direct
npmpinia-plugin-persistedstate^3.1.0direct
npmvue^3.3.2direct
npmvue-router^4.2.0direct
Gogithub.com/cloudflare/circl1.3.8indirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuid1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/gorilla/websocket1.5.1indirect
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compress1.17.8indirect
Gogolang.org/x/crypto0.23.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/net0.25.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sys0.20.0indirect
npm@rushstack/eslint-patch^1.2.0indirect
npm@tsconfig/node18^2.0.1indirect
npm@types/crypto-js^4.2.2indirect
npm@types/node^18.16.8indirect
npm@vitejs/plugin-vue^4.2.3indirect
npm@vue/eslint-config-prettier^7.1.0indirect
npm@vue/eslint-config-typescript^11.0.3indirect
npm@vue/tsconfig^0.4.0indirect
npmautoprefixer^10.4.14indirect
npmeslint^8.39.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-vue^9.11.0indirect
npmjavascript-obfuscator^4.1.0indirect
npmnpm-run-all^4.1.5indirect
npmpostcss^8.4.31indirect
npmprettier^2.8.8indirect
npmprettier-plugin-tailwindcss^0.2.8indirect
npmrollup^4.18.0indirect
npmrollup-plugin-obfuscator^1.1.0indirect
npmtailwindcss^3.3.2indirect
npmtypescript~5.0.4indirect
npmvite^4.5.3indirect
npmvite-plugin-pwa^0.14.7indirect
npmvue-tsc^1.6.4indirect
npmworkbox-cacheable-response^6.6.0indirect
npmworkbox-expiration^6.6.0indirect
npmworkbox-precaching^6.6.0indirect
npmworkbox-routing^6.6.0indirect
npmworkbox-strategies^6.6.0indirect
npmworkbox-window^6.6.0indirect
Dependency advisories 7

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 11 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 7 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 35 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/crypto0.23.0indirectcritical390.56.0
github.com/refraction-networking/utls1.6.6directmoderate61.8.2
github.com/cloudflare/circl1.3.8indirectmoderate41.6.3
github.com/gorilla/websocket1.5.1indirectmoderate21.5.3
golang.org/x/net0.25.0indirectmoderate161.27.0-rc.3
github.com/klauspost/compress1.17.8indirectunknown11.18.7
golang.org/x/sys0.20.0indirectunknown10.44.0

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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