Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-03 18:53 UTC

Jericho / ZoomNet

.NET client library for the Zoom.us REST API v2

C#MIT★ 73 stars⑂ 51 forkssince Mar 2019View on GitHub ↗

Jericho/ZoomNet holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (94/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (43/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

JerichoPersonal account
39 followers91 public repossince Aug 2009

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
NuGetZoomNet0.109.0-1250 days agozoomnetzoommeetingwebinar

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

94Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
26.3/36Commit cadence — 38/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 373 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year373
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year38

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~28.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag0.109.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases28.1
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?

56Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
30.1/60Stars — 73 stars
14.2/25Forks — 51 forks
3.9/15Watchers — 6 watchers
Inputs used
forks51
stars73
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges7
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesci.appveyor.com, codecov.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
62.9/80Total downloads — 1,121,330 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesZoomNet
dependents
ecosystemsnuget
total_downloads1,121,330
monthly_downloads
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 94% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 32 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled32
top_contributor_share0.942
How it's scored
38.1/42Issue resolution — 91% of issues closed
24.9/30PR acceptance — 79/95 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs79
open_issues34
closed_issues337
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.908
closed_unmerged_prs16
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 backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
11.5/25Owner reach — 39 followers of Jericho
25/25Track record — 91 public repos, account ~17 yr old
Inputs used
followers39
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginJericho
public_repos91
account_age_days6,205
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on nuget
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 125 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesZoomNet
ecosystemsnuget
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

43Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 2 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsapi, zoom
has_wikino
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

57Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
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 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated11
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive7
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): branch_protection, ci_tests, dangerous_workflow, packaging, pinned_dependencies, signed_releases, token_permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages24
unassessed_packages3
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 24 resolved dependencies against OSV. 3 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.

44Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
5.9/40Legible commit history — 11 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.11
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Source/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj, Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj, Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsSource/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj, Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj, Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
54.4/55Manageable file sizes — 11/1,043 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes1,078,645
source_files_sampled1,043
oversized_source_files11

Key facts

73GitHub stars
32contributors
373commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
34open issues
package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 51 ⇿
0Stars
51Forks
98Releases

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.

01020304050605122020-072023-072026-06
Major 0Minor 83Patch 15

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-03 18:53 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during GetBranch(main): error during branchesHandler.query: 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
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 20 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 29
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetFormitable.BetterStack.Logger.Microsoft0.1.3-beta0002Source/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Diagnostics10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Hosting10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Http10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests/ZoomNet.IntegrationTests.csproj
NuGetMartinCostello.Logging.XUnit.v30.7.1Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Http10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk18.8.1Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Testing.Extensions.CodeCoverage18.9.0Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetNSubstitute6.0.0Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetNSubstitute.Analyzers.CSharp1.0.17Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetRichardSzalay.MockHttp7.0.0Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetShouldly4.3.0Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetSystem.Text.Json10.0.10Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetxunit.v3.mtp-v24.0.0-pre.154Source/ZoomNet.UnitTests/ZoomNet.UnitTests.csproj
NuGetHttpMultipartParser10.0.0Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Http[8.0.0,11)Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging[8.0.0,11)Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.SourceLink.GitHub10.0.301Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetPathoschild.Http.FluentClient4.4.2Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetStyleCop.Analyzers1.2.0-beta.556Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetSystem.Text.Json[8.0.5,11)Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetSystem.ValueTuple4.6.2Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetWebsocket.Client5.5.0Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetPortable.System.DateTimeOnly9.0.1Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CSharp4.7.0Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
NuGetPortable.System.DateTimeOnly9.0.2Source/ZoomNet/ZoomNet.csproj
All dependencies 27

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 27 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetFormitable.BetterStack.Logger.Microsoft0.1.3-beta0002direct
NuGetHttpMultipartParser10.0.0direct
NuGetMartinCostello.Logging.XUnit.v30.7.1direct
NuGetMicrosoft.CSharp4.7.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Diagnostics10.0.10direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Hosting10.0.10direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Httpdirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Http10.0.10direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Loggingdirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging10.0.10direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging.Console10.0.10direct
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk18.8.1direct
NuGetMicrosoft.SourceLink.GitHub10.0.301direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Testing.Extensions.CodeCoverage18.9.0direct
NuGetNSubstitute6.0.0direct
NuGetNSubstitute.Analyzers.CSharp1.0.17direct
NuGetPathoschild.Http.FluentClient4.4.2direct
NuGetPortable.System.DateTimeOnly9.0.1direct
NuGetPortable.System.DateTimeOnly9.0.2direct
NuGetRichardSzalay.MockHttp7.0.0direct
NuGetShouldly4.3.0direct
NuGetStyleCop.Analyzers1.2.0-beta.556direct
NuGetSystem.Text.Jsondirect
NuGetSystem.Text.Json10.0.10direct
NuGetSystem.ValueTuple4.6.2direct
NuGetWebsocket.Client5.5.0direct
NuGetxunit.v3.mtp-v24.0.0-pre.154direct
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 24 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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