Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-02 16:30 UTC

Laerdal / Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android

C# MAUI binding library for Android built around Nordic Semiconductor's Android DFU Library

Custom license★ 1 star⑂ 1 forksince Jun 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#android#binding#bluetooth#csharp#dotnet#laerdal#nordic-dfu#nuget

Laerdal/Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android holds a health index of 62 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (70/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (23/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

62
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.

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

Ownership

LaerdalOrganization
20 followers64 public repossince Aug 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
NuGetLaerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android2.11.0.43913-310 days agolaerdalinternalbletoolsmauidfubluetoothnordicsemiconductor

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

70Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

62Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
13.5/18Commit volume — 31 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year31
human_commit_share0.94
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year3

Release discipline

83Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 10 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~73.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tag2.11.0.43913
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases73.2

Community & Adoption

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

46Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

3Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 1 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars1
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

86Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

60Moderate
How it's scored
48/80Total downloads — 41,544 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesLaerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android
dependents—
ecosystemsnuget
total_downloads41,544
monthly_downloads—
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?

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

31At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 59% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.586

Issue & PR responsiveness

67Good
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 23/23 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs23
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

64Moderate
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
9.5/25Owner reach — 20 followers of Laerdal
25/25Track record — 64 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers20
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginLaerdal
public_repos64
account_age_days3,661

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 — 31 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesLaerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android
ecosystemsnuget
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

50Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

50Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsandroid, binding, bluetooth, csharp, dotnet, laerdal, nordic-dfu, nuget
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

65Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

56Moderate
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
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
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-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_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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_packages30
unassessed_packages0
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 30 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.

23At Risk · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

26At Risk
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
25.5/40Legible commit history — 45 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.479
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

21At Risk
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android/Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 6 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_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsLaerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android/Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0.06

Key facts

1GitHub stars
2contributors
31commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
0open issues
NuGetpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.6 / 10
5.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-02 16:30 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
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
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
8SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Core1.15.0.2Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android/Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android.csproj
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.LocalBroadcastManager1.1.0.22Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android/Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android.csproj
All dependencies 30

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 28 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Core1.15.0.2direct
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.LocalBroadcastManager1.1.0.22direct
NuGetMicrosoft.Build.Tasks.Git8.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.SourceLink.Common8.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.SourceLink.GitHub8.0.0indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Annotation1.9.1.5indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Annotation.Experimental1.4.1.8indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Annotation.Jvm1.9.1.5indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Arch.Core.Common2.2.0.15indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Arch.Core.Runtime2.2.0.15indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Collection1.4.5.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Collection.Jvm1.4.5.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Concurrent.Futures1.2.0.5indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Interpolator1.0.0.31indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Lifecycle.Common2.8.7.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Lifecycle.Common.Jvm2.8.7.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Lifecycle.Runtime2.8.7.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Lifecycle.Runtime.Android2.8.7.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.ProfileInstaller.ProfileInstaller1.4.1.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Startup.StartupRuntime1.2.0.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.Tracing.Tracing1.2.0.9indirect
NuGetXamarin.AndroidX.VersionedParcelable1.2.0.9indirect
NuGetXamarin.Google.Guava.ListenableFuture1.0.0.26indirect
NuGetXamarin.Jetbrains.Annotations26.0.2.3indirect
NuGetXamarin.Kotlin.StdLib2.2.0.1indirect
NuGetXamarin.KotlinX.AtomicFU0.26.1.1indirect
NuGetXamarin.KotlinX.AtomicFU.Jvm0.26.1.1indirect
NuGetXamarin.KotlinX.Coroutines.Android1.9.0.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.KotlinX.Coroutines.Core1.9.0.2indirect
NuGetXamarin.KotlinX.Coroutines.Core.Jvm1.9.0.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 30 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with Laerdal/Laerdal.Dfu.Bindings.Android. Read them side by side →

100AvaloniaUI/AvaloniaDevelop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The future of .NET UIExceptional98unoplatform/unoOpen-source platform for building cross-platform native Mobile, Web, Desktop, and Embedded apps from a single C#/XAML codebase. Work from any IDE/CLI with Hot Reload, Visual Designer, MCPs, and Skills built for modern .NET workflows. 200M+ NuGet downloads.Exceptional94MonoGame/MonoGameOne framework for creating powerful cross-platform games.Exceptional94NLog/NLogNLog - Flexible and Structured Logging for various .NET PlatformsExceptional98dotnet/maui.NET MAUI is the .NET Multi-platform App UI, a framework for building native device applications spanning mobile, tablet, and desktop.Exceptional92CommunityToolkit/MauiThe .NET MAUI Community Toolkit is a community-created library that contains .NET MAUI Extensions, Advanced UI/UX Controls, and Behaviors to help make your life as a .NET MAUI developer easierExcellent

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 — NuGet.