Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-08 20:08 UTC

HexRaysSA / ida-nexus

⚠️ Experimental ⚠️ IDA Nexus allows multiple clients to seamlessly share and operate on IDA databases.

PythonMIT★ 145 stars⑂ 4 forkssince May 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

HexRaysSA/ida-nexus holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (81/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (44/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

69
overall / 100
Good

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.

69
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 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Hex-Rays SAOrganization
424 followers24 public repossince Jan 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIida-nexus0.13.413,333260 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence — 16/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 219 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 25 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year219
human_commit_share0.72
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year16
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 38 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count38
latest_release_tagv0.13.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases2.6

Community & Adoption

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

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35/60Stars — 145 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars145
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
55/80Monthly downloads — 13,333 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesida-nexus
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads13,333
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 96% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 5 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.962
How it's scored
23.4/42Issue resolution — 56% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 11/11 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 3/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs11
open_issues24
closed_issues30
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d6
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.556
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d3
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
18.9/25Owner reach — 424 followers of HexRaysSA
17.7/25Track record — 24 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers424
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginHexRaysSA
public_repos24
account_age_days1,368

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 — 26 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesida-nexus
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

59Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 1 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsexperimental
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

48Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 6 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
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 3/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 25 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
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.
6.8/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.8
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.

44Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
8.9/40Legible commit history — 12 of 72 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.167
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — ida_nexus/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsida_nexus/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (ida_nexus/py.typed)
53.9/55Manageable file sizes — 1/49 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes77,598
source_files_sampled49
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

145GitHub stars
5contributors
219commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
38releases
1bus factor
24open 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:ida-nexus@0.13.4; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4 ⇿
0Stars
4Forks
37Releases

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.

1223344412026-082026-092026-10
Major 0Minor 12Patch 25
OpenSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10
4.8aggregate

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 · 2026-10-08 20:08 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 6 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 3/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 25 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
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.
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIida-domain>=0.5.1pyproject.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.

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.