Public recordAt Risk
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 10:03 UTC
IceCodeNew / mtg
Highly opinionated MTPROTO proxy for Telegram
IceCodeNew/mtg holds a health index of 28 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Vitality (59/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (12/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.
28
overall / 100Software 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.
28
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)
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). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.
Ownership
IceCodeNewPersonal account
254 followers86 public repossince Oct 2017PKU
This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.
Package ecosystems
| Registry | Package | Version | Downloads / mo | Versions | Last publish |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/IceCodeNew/mtg | v1.0.7 | - | 2 | 2127 days ago |
Metrics by category
Vitality
Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?
59
Development activity
77Good
How it's scored
| 36/36 | Push recency — last push 3 days ago |
| 13.2/36 | Commit cadence — 19/52 weeks with commits |
| 18/18 | Commit volume — 374 commits in the last year |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| commits_last_year | 374 |
| human_commit_share | — |
| days_since_last_push | 3 |
| active_weeks_last_year | 19 |
Release discipline
32At Risk
How it's scored
| 16.2/27 | Ships releases — 3 version tags (no GitHub releases) |
| 0/36 | Release recency — latest release 2,127 days ago |
| 12.6/27 | Release cadence — a release every ~344.3 days |
| 0/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data |
Inputs used
| releases_count | 3 |
| latest_release_tag | v1.0.7 |
| releases_from_tags | yes |
| days_since_latest_release | 2,127 |
| mean_days_between_releases | 344.3 |
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?
12
Popularity & adoption
1Critical
How it's scored
| 0/60 | Stars — 1 stars |
| 0/25 | Forks — 1 forks |
| 0/15 | Watchers — 0 watchers |
Inputs used
| forks | 1 |
| stars | 1 |
| watchers | 0 |
| growth_state | unverified |
| growth_factor_pct | 100 |
| growth_unverified_reason | no_history |
Community health
25At Risk
How it's scored
| 0/22.5 | README |
| 22.5/22.5 | License — recognized license (MIT) |
| 0/18 | CONTRIBUTING guide |
| 0/13.5 | Code of conduct |
| 0/7.2 | Issue template |
| 0/6.3 | PR template |
Inputs used
| has_readme | no |
| has_license | no |
| readme_badges | — |
| has_contributing | no |
| has_issue_template | no |
| has_code_of_conduct | no |
| readme_badge_services | — |
| has_pull_request_template | no |
Sustainability & Governance
Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?
51
How it's scored
| 9/54 | Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| 2.1/22.5 | Commit distribution — top contributor authored 91% of commits |
| 13.5/13.5 | Contributor breadth — 30 contributors |
| 10/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
Inputs used
| bus_factor | 1 |
| contributors_sampled | 30 |
| top_contributor_share | 0.906 |
Issue & PR responsiveness
50Moderate
How it's scored
| 28/42 | Issue resolution — 67% of issues closed |
| 15.2/30 | PR acceptance — 42/83 decided PRs merged |
| 0/13 | Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| 0/15 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
Inputs used
| merged_prs | 42 |
| open_issues | 1 |
| closed_issues | 2 |
| prs_merged_7d | — |
| prs_decided_7d | — |
| prs_merged_30d | — |
| prs_decided_30d | — |
| issue_closed_ratio | 0.667 |
| closed_unmerged_prs | 41 |
| 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.
Ownership & stewardship
65Good
How it's scored
| 10/30 | Ownership backing — personal (user) account |
| 0/20 | Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts |
| 17.3/25 | Owner reach — 254 followers of IceCodeNew |
| 25/25 | Track record — 86 public repos, account ~8 yr old |
Inputs used
| followers | 254 |
| owner_type | User |
| is_verified | — |
| owner_login | IceCodeNew |
| public_repos | 86 |
| account_age_days | 3,207 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
Package maintenance
61Moderate
How it's scored
| 25/25 | Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go |
| 4/35 | Publish recency — latest publish 2,127 days ago |
| 12/20 | Version history — 2 published versions |
| 20/20 | Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked |
Inputs used
| packages | github.com/IceCodeNew/mtg |
| ecosystems | go |
| any_deprecated | no |
| min_days_since_publish | 2,127 |
Engineering Quality
Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?
41
Engineering practices
68Good
How it's scored
| 24/24 | CI workflows — 2 workflow(s) |
| 24/24 | Tests present |
| 0/16 | Linter config |
| 0/9.6 | Pre-commit hooks |
| 0/6.4 | .editorconfig |
| 20/20 | OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
Inputs used
| has_ci | yes |
| has_tests | yes |
| has_editorconfig | no |
| has_linter_config | no |
| has_precommit_config | no |
Documentation
1Critical
How it's scored
| 0/30 | README |
| 0/25 | Documentation directory |
| 0/15 | Documentation / homepage site |
| 0/10 | Repository description |
| 0/10 | Topics |
| 0/10 | Wiki |
Inputs used
| topics | — |
| has_wiki | no |
| homepage | — |
| docs_site | — |
| has_readme | no |
| has_docs_dir | no |
| has_description | no |
Security
Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?
34
Security posture
34At Risk
Jurisdiction risk alert
High-risk jurisdiction exposure detected
1 contributor organization profilesRussia
Based on self-published public profile locations. This governance signal does not determine nationality, citizenship, intent, sanctions status, or individual trustworthiness.
How jurisdiction exposure is assessedHow it's scored
| 7.5/7.5 | Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo |
| 0.8/7.5 | Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 2.5/2.5 | CI-Tests — 10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/2.5 | CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0/7.5 | Code-Review — Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 2.5/2.5 | Contributors — project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10/10 | Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected |
| 5/5 | Fuzzing — project is fuzzed |
| 2.5/2.5 | License — license file detected |
| 7.5/7.5 | Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0/5 | Packaging — no data |
| 4/5 | Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8 |
| 5/5 | SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 5/5 | Security-Policy — security policy file detected |
| 0/7.5 | Signed-Releases — no data |
| 7.5/7.5 | Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege |
| 6.8/7.5 | Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Inputs used
| source | openssf_scorecard |
| checks_evaluated | 16 |
| scorecard_version | v5.5.0 |
| checks_inconclusive | 2 |
| scorecard_aggregate | 8 |
| high_risk_jurisdiction_cap | 34 |
| high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier | 75 |
| security_posture_after_multiplier | 60 |
| security_posture_before_jurisdiction | 80 |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 75% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.
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.
58
Agent context & guidance
1Critical
How it's scored
| 0/45 | Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| 0/15 | Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) |
| 0/40 | Legible commit history — no data |
Inputs used
| has_llms_txt | no |
| llms_txt_url | — |
| legible_history_share | — |
| agent_instruction_files | — |
| agent_instruction_max_bytes | — |
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)
84Excellent
How it's scored
| 18/18 | One-command bootstrap — .mise.toml |
| 22/22 | Automated tests |
| 0/11 | Lint / format config |
| 11/11 | Static type checking — Go (statically typed) |
| 10/10 | Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile |
| 0/10 | Demonstrated agent practice — no data |
| 0/8 | Automated maintenance — no data |
| 8/10 | OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8 |
Inputs used
| has_nix | no |
| has_tests | yes |
| lockfiles | go.sum |
| has_dockerfile | yes |
| typed_language | yes |
| bootstrap_files | .mise.toml |
| has_devcontainer | no |
| has_linter_config | no |
| 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.
Code legibility for models
100Exceptional
How it's scored
| 45/45 | Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed) |
| 55/55 | Manageable file sizes — 0/233 source files over 60KB |
Inputs used
| primary_language | Go |
| largest_source_bytes | 19,961 |
| source_files_sampled | 233 |
| oversized_source_files | 0 |
Key facts
1GitHub stars
30contributors
374commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
3releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Gopackage ecosystems
Data collection warnings
- Community profile unavailable
More detail
OpenSSF Scorecard 8.0 / 10
8.0aggregate
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).
| 10 | Binary-Artifacts | no binaries found in the repo |
| 1 | Branch-Protection | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| 10 | CI-Tests | 10 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| 0 | CII-Best-Practices | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| 0 | Code-Review | Found 0/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| 10 | Contributors | project has 4 contributing companies or organizations |
| 10 | Dangerous-Workflow | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| 10 | Dependency-Update-Tool | update tool detected |
| 10 | Fuzzing | project is fuzzed |
| 10 | License | license file detected |
| 10 | Maintained | 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| n/a | Packaging | packaging workflow not detected |
| 8 | Pinned-Dependencies | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8 |
| 10 | SAST | SAST tool is run on all commits |
| 10 | Security-Policy | security policy file detected |
| n/a | Signed-Releases | no releases found |
| 10 | Token-Permissions | GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege |
| 9 | Vulnerabilities | 1 existing vulnerabilities detected |
Direct dependencies 23
| Registry | Package | Version constraint | Manifest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/OneOfOne/xxhash | v1.2.8 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/alecthomas/kong | v1.16.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/alecthomas/units | v0.0.0-20240927000941-0f3dac36c52b | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/armon/go-socks5 | v0.0.0-20160902184237-e75332964ef5 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/babolivier/go-doh-client | v0.0.0-20201028162107-a76cff4cb8b6 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/jarcoal/httpmock | v1.4.1 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/mccutchen/go-httpbin/v2 | v2.24.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/panjf2000/ants/v2 | v2.12.1 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/prometheus/client_golang | v1.23.2 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/rs/zerolog | v1.35.1 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/smira/go-statsd | v1.3.4 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/testify | v1.11.1 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/tylertreat/BoomFilters | v0.0.0-20251117164519-53813c36cc1b | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/crypto | v0.54.0 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/net | v0.57.0 | go.mod |
| Go | golang.org/x/sys | v0.47.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/beevik/ntp | v1.5.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/ncruces/go-dns | v1.3.3 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/pelletier/go-toml/v2 | v2.4.3 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/pires/go-proxyproto | v0.15.0 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/things-go/go-socks5 | v0.1.1 | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/txthinking/socks5 | v0.0.0-20260601051520-339b044ab0eb | go.mod |
| Go | github.com/yl2chen/cidranger | v1.0.2 | go.mod |
All dependencies 45
Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 23 direct and 22 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.
| Registry | Package | Version | Relation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/alecthomas/kong | v1.16.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/alecthomas/units | v0.0.0-20240927000941-0f3dac36c52b | direct |
| Go | github.com/armon/go-socks5 | v0.0.0-20160902184237-e75332964ef5 | direct |
| Go | github.com/babolivier/go-doh-client | v0.0.0-20201028162107-a76cff4cb8b6 | direct |
| Go | github.com/beevik/ntp | v1.5.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/jarcoal/httpmock | v1.4.1 | direct |
| Go | github.com/mccutchen/go-httpbin/v2 | v2.24.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/ncruces/go-dns | v1.3.3 | direct |
| Go | github.com/oneofone/xxhash | v1.2.8 | direct |
| Go | github.com/panjf2000/ants/v2 | v2.12.1 | direct |
| Go | github.com/pelletier/go-toml/v2 | v2.4.3 | direct |
| Go | github.com/pires/go-proxyproto | v0.15.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/prometheus/client_golang | v1.23.2 | direct |
| Go | github.com/rs/zerolog | v1.35.1 | direct |
| Go | github.com/smira/go-statsd | v1.3.4 | direct |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/testify | v1.11.1 | direct |
| Go | github.com/things-go/go-socks5 | v0.1.1 | direct |
| Go | github.com/txthinking/socks5 | v0.0.0-20260601051520-339b044ab0eb | direct |
| Go | github.com/tylertreat/boomfilters | v0.0.0-20251117164519-53813c36cc1b | direct |
| Go | github.com/yl2chen/cidranger | v1.0.2 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/crypto | v0.54.0 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/net | v0.57.0 | direct |
| Go | golang.org/x/sys | v0.47.0 | direct |
| Go | github.com/beorn7/perks | v1.0.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/cespare/xxhash/v2 | v2.3.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/d4l3k/messagediff | v1.2.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/davecgh/go-spew | v1.1.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/klauspost/compress | v1.18.3 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/kr/text | v0.2.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-colorable | v0.1.14 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/mattn/go-isatty | v0.0.20 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/munnerz/goautoneg | v0.0.0-20191010083416-a7dc8b61c822 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/patrickmn/go-cache | v2.1.0+incompatible | indirect |
| Go | github.com/pmezard/go-difflib | v1.0.0 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/prometheus/client_model | v0.6.2 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/prometheus/common | v0.67.5 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/prometheus/procfs | v0.20.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/rogpeppe/go-internal | v1.14.1 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/stretchr/objx | v0.5.2 | indirect |
| Go | github.com/txthinking/runnergroup | v0.0.0-20250224021307-5864ffeb65ae | indirect |
| Go | go.yaml.in/yaml/v2 | v2.4.4 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/sync | v0.20.0 | indirect |
| Go | golang.org/x/tools | v0.41.0 | indirect |
| Go | google.golang.org/protobuf | v1.36.11 | indirect |
| Go | gopkg.in/yaml.v3 | v3.0.1 | indirect |
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.
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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.
How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — Go.