Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-18 21:46 UTC

IceWhaleTech / CasaOS-Common

Common structs and functions for CasaOS

GoApache-2.0★ 11 stars⑂ 15 forkssince Aug 2022View on GitHub ↗

KindNetwork serviceLibraryhow this is determined

IceWhaleTech/CasaOS-Common holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (75/100) and lowest on Security (32/100). It was last updated 145 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Moderate

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.

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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

IceWhaleOrganization

1,009 followers56 public repossince Sep 2021

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
Go	github.com/IceWhaleTech/CasaOS-Common	v0.4.21	-	91	145 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

44Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

19Critical

How it's scored

9.9/36	Push recency — last push 145 days ago
2.1/36	Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
7/18	Commit volume — 5 commits in the last year
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

commits_last_year	5
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	145
active_weeks_last_year	3

Release discipline

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 24 releases published
27/36	Release recency — latest release 145 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~46.4 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	24
latest_release_tag	v0.4.21
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	145
mean_days_between_releases	46.4

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?

39Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

29At Risk

How it's scored

16.2/60	Stars — 11 stars
9.6/25	Forks — 15 forks
3.3/15	Watchers — 5 watchers

Inputs used

forks	15
stars	11
watchers	5
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	3
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	codecov.io, goreportcard.com, pkg.go.dev
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

75Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

57Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.4/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 40% of commits
8.1/13.5	Contributor breadth — 6 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 9 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	6
top_contributor_share	0.404

Issue & PR responsiveness

79Good

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — no issues or no data
28.1/30	PR acceptance — 72/77 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5

Inputs used

merged_prs	72
open_issues	0
closed_issues	0
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	—
closed_unmerged_prs	5
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

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

Ownership & stewardship

74Good

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
21.6/25	Owner reach — 1,009 followers of IceWhaleTech
22.9/25	Track record — 56 public repos, account ~5 yr old

Inputs used

followers	1,009
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	IceWhaleTech
public_repos	56
account_age_days	1,850

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 145 days ago
20/20	Version history — 91 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/IceWhaleTech/CasaOS-Common
ecosystems	go
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	145

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

59Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

48Weak

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
0/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

75Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 2 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	go, golang
has_wiki	no
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

32At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

31At Risk

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5	CI-Tests — 1 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 9 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
0/7.5	Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 53 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	3.1

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

34At Risk

How it's scored

3.6/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 6 affected: golang.org/x/crypto v0.23.0 (critical 10.0), github.com/golang-jwt/jwt/v4 v4.5.0 (high 7.5), github.com/labstack/echo/v4 v4.12.0 (high 7.5), +3 more
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
21.9/40	No advisories left outstanding — 4 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 925 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	86
affected_packages	14
assessed_packages	55
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	critical 1, high 6, moderate 4, unknown 3
direct_affected_packages	6

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 55 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.

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.

57Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

36Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
36.3/40	Legible commit history — 68 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.68
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

56Moderate

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	go.sum
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/52 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Go
largest_source_bytes	40,446
source_files_sampled	52
oversized_source_files	0

Key facts

11GitHub stars

6contributors

5commits, last 12 months

145days since last push

24releases

2bus factor

0open issues

Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 15 ⇿

0Stars

15Forks

24Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 0Patch 7

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10

3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-10-18 21:46 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
0	CI-Tests	1 out of 25 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5	Code-Review	Found 15/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10	Contributors	project has 9 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
0	Maintained	0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0	Vulnerabilities	53 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 20

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
Go	github.com/coreos/go-systemd/v22	`v22.5.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify	`v1.7.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/golang-jwt/jwt/v4	`v4.5.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/google/safetext	`v0.0.0-20240104143208-7a7d9b3d812f`	go.mod
Go	github.com/gorilla/websocket	`v1.5.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/labstack/echo-jwt/v4	`v4.2.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/labstack/echo/v4	`v4.12.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/mattn/go-sqlite3	`v1.14.16`	go.mod
Go	github.com/mholt/archiver/v3	`v3.5.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/oapi-codegen/runtime	`v1.1.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/orca-zhang/ecache	`v1.1.3`	go.mod
Go	github.com/samber/lo	`v1.38.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`v1.9.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`v1.9.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/tidwall/gjson	`v1.17.0`	go.mod
Go	go.uber.org/zap	`v1.24.0`	go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/crypto	`v0.23.0`	go.mod
Go	gopkg.in/ini.v1	`v1.67.0`	go.mod
Go	gopkg.in/natefinch/lumberjack.v2	`v2.2.1`	go.mod
Go	gotest.tools/v3	`v3.4.0`	go.mod

All dependencies 55

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 20 direct and 35 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/coreos/go-systemd/v22	`v22.5.0`	direct
Go	github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify	`v1.7.0`	direct
Go	github.com/golang-jwt/jwt/v4	`v4.5.0`	direct
Go	github.com/google/safetext	`v0.0.0-20240104143208-7a7d9b3d812f`	direct
Go	github.com/gorilla/websocket	`v1.5.0`	direct
Go	github.com/labstack/echo-jwt/v4	`v4.2.0`	direct
Go	github.com/labstack/echo/v4	`v4.12.0`	direct
Go	github.com/mattn/go-sqlite3	`v1.14.16`	direct
Go	github.com/mholt/archiver/v3	`v3.5.1`	direct
Go	github.com/oapi-codegen/runtime	`v1.1.1`	direct
Go	github.com/orca-zhang/ecache	`v1.1.3`	direct
Go	github.com/samber/lo	`v1.38.1`	direct
Go	github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`v1.9.0`	direct
Go	github.com/stretchr/testify	`v1.9.0`	direct
Go	github.com/tidwall/gjson	`v1.17.0`	direct
Go	go.uber.org/zap	`v1.24.0`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/crypto	`v0.23.0`	direct
Go	gopkg.in/ini.v1	`v1.67.0`	direct
Go	gopkg.in/natefinch/lumberjack.v2	`v2.2.1`	direct
Go	gotest.tools/v3	`v3.4.0`	direct
Go	github.com/andybalholm/brotli	`v1.0.5`	indirect
Go	github.com/apapsch/go-jsonmerge/v2	`v2.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/davecgh/go-spew	`v1.1.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/dsnet/compress	`v0.0.2-0.20210315054119-f66993602bf5`	indirect
Go	github.com/godbus/dbus/v5	`v5.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/golang-jwt/jwt	`v3.2.2+incompatible`	indirect
Go	github.com/golang-jwt/jwt/v5	`v5.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/golang/snappy	`v0.0.4`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/go-cmp	`v0.5.9`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`v1.5.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/klauspost/compress	`v1.16.7`	indirect
Go	github.com/klauspost/pgzip	`v1.2.5`	indirect
Go	github.com/labstack/gommon	`v0.4.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/mattn/go-colorable	`v0.1.13`	indirect
Go	github.com/mattn/go-isatty	`v0.0.20`	indirect
Go	github.com/nwaples/rardecode	`v1.1.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/pierrec/lz4/v4	`v4.1.17`	indirect
Go	github.com/pkg/errors	`v0.9.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/pmezard/go-difflib	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/tidwall/match	`v1.1.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/tidwall/pretty	`v1.2.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/ulikunitz/xz	`v0.5.11`	indirect
Go	github.com/valyala/bytebufferpool	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/valyala/fasttemplate	`v1.2.2`	indirect
Go	github.com/xi2/xz	`v0.0.0-20171230120015-48954b6210f8`	indirect
Go	go.uber.org/atomic	`v1.10.0`	indirect
Go	go.uber.org/goleak	`v1.2.1`	indirect
Go	go.uber.org/multierr	`v1.11.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/exp	`v0.0.0-20220303212507-bbda1eaf7a17`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/net	`v0.25.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`v0.20.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/text	`v0.15.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/time	`v0.5.0`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/yaml.v3	`v3.0.1`	indirect
Go	mvdan.cc/sh/v3	`v3.7.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 14

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 55 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 14 carry known advisories, of which 6 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
golang.org/x/crypto	`v0.23.0`	direct	critical	39	`0.56.0`
github.com/golang-jwt/jwt/v4	`v4.5.0`	direct	high	4	`5.2.2`
github.com/labstack/echo/v4	`v4.12.0`	direct	high	2	`5.2.0`
github.com/mholt/archiver/v3	`v3.5.1`	direct	high	4	—
github.com/sirupsen/logrus	`v1.9.0`	direct	high	2	`1.9.3`
github.com/golang-jwt/jwt	`v3.2.2+incompatible`	indirect	high	2	`5.2.2`
github.com/golang-jwt/jwt/v5	`v5.0.0`	indirect	high	2	`5.2.2`
github.com/gorilla/websocket	`v1.5.0`	direct	moderate	2	`1.5.3`
github.com/nwaples/rardecode	`v1.1.3`	indirect	moderate	2	`2.2.0`
github.com/ulikunitz/xz	`v0.5.11`	indirect	moderate	2	`0.5.15`
golang.org/x/net	`v0.25.0`	indirect	moderate	21	`1.27.2`
github.com/klauspost/compress	`v1.16.7`	indirect	unknown	1	`1.18.7`
golang.org/x/sys	`v0.20.0`	indirect	unknown	1	`0.44.0`
golang.org/x/text	`v0.15.0`	indirect	unknown	2	`0.41.0`

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.

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 — Go.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records