Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-20 17:33 UTC

IronCoreLabs / recrypt-rs

A set of cryptographic primitives for building a multi-hop Proxy Re-encryption scheme, known as Transform Encryption.

RustAGPL-3.0★ 168 stars⑂ 23 forkssince Sep 2018View on GitHub ↗

IronCoreLabs/recrypt-rs holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (79/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (53/100). It was last updated 56 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

75
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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

IronCore LabsOrganization · verified domain
35 followers53 public repossince Mar 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iorecrypt0.16.03,31630224 days agocryptographyeccpreproxy-re-encryptiontransform-encryptionalgorithms

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

60Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 56 days ago
9/36Commit cadence — 13/52 weeks with commits
14/18Commit volume — 35 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year35
human_commit_share0.63
days_since_last_push56
active_weeks_last_year13
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 34 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 56 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~69.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count34
latest_release_tag0.16.1-rc.7
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release56
mean_days_between_releases69.7
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?

53Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
36.1/60Stars — 168 stars
11.2/25Forks — 23 forks
4.7/15Watchers — 8 watchers
Inputs used
forks23
stars168
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (AGPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
46.9/80Monthly downloads — 3,316 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrecrypt
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads121,695
monthly_downloads3,316
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?

79Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 31% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 11 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled11
top_contributor_share0.309
How it's scored
38.1/42Issue resolution — 91% of issues closed
25.7/30PR acceptance — 142/166 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 6/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs142
open_issues6
closed_issues58
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.906
closed_unmerged_prs24
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
11.2/25Owner reach — 35 followers of IronCoreLabs
24.6/25Track record — 53 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers35
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginIronCoreLabs
public_repos53
account_age_days4,243
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 224 days ago
20/20Version history — 30 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrecrypt
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish224

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

70Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 15 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://crates.io/crates/recrypt
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscryptography, rust, proxy-re-encryption, transform-encryption, ecc, constant-time, end-to-end-encryption
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://crates.io/crates/recrypt
docs_sitehttps://crates.io/crates/recrypt
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 15 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 6/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
3.8/7.5Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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 — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
24.7/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: clear_on_drop 0.2.5 (unknown), derivative 2.2.0 (unknown)
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
37.2/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 846 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages2
assessed_packages91
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 2
direct_affected_packages2
Matched the crates:recrypt@0.16.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 91 packages. 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.

65Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://ironcorelabs.com/llms.txt)
37.2/40Legible commit history — 44 of 63 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://ironcorelabs.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.698
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Nix
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 37 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixyes
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.37
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
48.9/55Manageable file sizes — 3/27 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes75,752
source_files_sampled27
oversized_source_files3

Key facts

168GitHub stars
11contributors
35commits, last 12 months
56days since last push
34releases
2bus factor
6open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 23 ⇿
0Stars
23Forks
25Releases

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.

048121620242322018-092022-052026-01
Major 0Minor 12Patch 13

Each point covers 7 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-10-20 17:32 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
9CI-Tests15 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 6/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 14
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iocfg-if1Cargo.toml
crates.ioclear_on_drop0.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioderivative2.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioed25519-dalek=3.0.0Cargo.toml
crates.iogetrandom0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iogridiron0.12.2Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iolazy_static1.4Cargo.toml
crates.iolog0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ionum-traits0.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioquick-error2Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.10Cargo.toml
crates.iorand_chacha0.10Cargo.toml
crates.iosha20.11Cargo.toml
All dependencies 19

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 14 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iocfg-if—direct
crates.ioclear_on_drop—direct
crates.ioderivative—direct
crates.ioed25519-dalek3.0.0direct
crates.iogetrandom—direct
crates.iogridiron—direct
crates.iohex—direct
crates.iolazy_static—direct
crates.iolog—direct
crates.ionum-traits—direct
crates.ioquick-error—direct
crates.iorand—direct
crates.iorand_chacha—direct
crates.iosha2—direct
crates.iocriterion—indirect
crates.iolibc—indirect
crates.ioproptest—indirect
crates.ioserde_json—indirect
crates.iowinapi—indirect
Dependency advisories 2

Installing crates:recrypt@0.16.0 pulls in 91 packages, direct and transitive: 2 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
clear_on_drop0.2.5directunknown1—
derivative2.2.0directunknown1—

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 — crates.io.