Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 06:29 UTC

Lombiq / Hastlayer-SDK

Turning .NET software into FPGA hardware for faster execution and lower power usage.

VHDLBSD-3-Clause★ 320 stars⑂ 34 forkssince Sep 2017View on GitHub ↗

Lombiq/Hastlayer-SDK holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (84/100) and lowest on Vitality (57/100). It was last updated 39 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Lombiq Technologies Ltd.Organization · verified domain
126 followers215 public repossince Jul 2014

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

57Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 39 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
14.8/18Commit volume — 43 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year43
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push39
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 18 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 39 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~347.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tagv3.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release39
mean_days_between_releases347.7

Community & Adoption

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

71Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
40.6/60Stars — 320 stars
12.7/25Forks — 34 forks
6/15Watchers — 13 watchers
Inputs used
forks34
stars320
watchers13
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

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
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 50% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 6 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.499
How it's scored
17.6/42Issue resolution — 42% of issues closed
20.6/30PR acceptance — 35/51 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs35
open_issues36
closed_issues26
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.419
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
15.1/25Owner reach — 126 followers of Lombiq
25/25Track record — 215 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers126
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginLombiq
public_repos215
account_age_days4,447

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

84Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://hastlayer.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsfpga, lombiq, hardware, dotnet, performance
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://hastlayer.com
docs_sitehttps://hastlayer.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

65Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 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
0.8/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 6 contributing companies or organizations
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 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
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-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_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
advisories4
affected_packages3
assessed_packages115
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 3
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 115 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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
6/40Legible commit history — 11 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.112
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes669
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Console/Hast.NuGet.Console.csproj, NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Algorithms/Hast.Algorithms.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 2 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_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsNuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Console/Hast.NuGet.Console.csproj, NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Algorithms/Hast.Algorithms.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Catapult/Hast.Catapult.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Common/Hast.Common.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Communication.Tester/Hast.Communication.Tester.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Communication/Hast.Communication.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Console/Hast.Console.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Layer/Hast.Layer.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Synthesis/Hast.Synthesis.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Transformer.Vhdl/Hast.Transformer.Vhdl.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Transformer/Hast.Transformer.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.VhdlBuilder/Hast.VhdlBuilder.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Vitis/Hast.Vitis.csproj, src/Hastlayer/Hast.Xilinx/Hast.Xilinx.csproj, src/Samples/Hast.Samples.Consumer/Hast.Samples.Consumer.csproj, src/Samples/Hast.Samples.Demo/Hast.Samples.Demo.csproj, src/Samples/Hast.Samples.Kpz.Algorithms/Hast.Samples.Kpz.Algorithms.csproj, src/Samples/Hast.Samples.SampleAssembly/Hast.Samples.SampleAssembly.csproj, test/Hast.Algorithms.Tests/Hast.Algorithms.Tests.csproj, test/Hast.DynamicTests/Hast.DynamicTests.csproj, test/Hast.TestBase/Hast.TestBase.csproj, test/Hast.Transformer.Tests/Hast.Transformer.Tests.csproj, test/Hast.Transformer.Vhdl.Tests.Common/Hast.Transformer.Vhdl.Tests.Common.csproj, test/Hast.Transformer.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.Transformer.Vhdl.Tests.csproj, test/Hast.Vitis.Tests/Hast.Vitis.Tests.csproj, test/TestInputAssemblies/ClassStructureExamples/Hast.TestInputs.ClassStructure1/Hast.TestInputs.ClassStructure1.csproj, test/TestInputAssemblies/ClassStructureExamples/Hast.TestInputs.ClassStructure2/Hast.TestInputs.ClassStructure2.csproj, test/TestInputAssemblies/Hast.TestInputs.Base/Hast.TestInputs.Base.csproj, test/TestInputAssemblies/Hast.TestInputs.Dynamic/Hast.TestInputs.Dynamic.csproj, test/TestInputAssemblies/Hast.TestInputs.Invalid/Hast.TestInputs.Invalid.csproj, test/TestInputAssemblies/Hast.TestInputs.Static/Hast.TestInputs.Static.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — VHDL without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/634 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageVHDL
largest_source_bytes42,077
source_files_sampled634
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — samples
Inputs used
example_dirssamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

320GitHub stars
6contributors
43commits, last 12 months
39days since last push
18releases
2bus factor
36open 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 ★ / 34 ⇿
0Stars
34Forks
12Releases

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.

01325383322017-092021-052025-01
Major 1Minor 1Patch 8

Each point covers 7 days.

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 · 2026-09-17 06:29 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
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
10CI-Tests1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 1/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 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
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
9Security-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 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetHast.Algorithms3.0.0NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Console/Hast.NuGet.Console.csproj
NuGetHast.Layer3.0.0NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Console/Hast.NuGet.Console.csproj
NuGetHast.Vitis.HardwareFramework1.2.0NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Console/Hast.NuGet.Console.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.CSharp4.7.0NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk16.5.0NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj
NuGetSystem.Memory4.5.4NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj
NuGetxunit2.4.1NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudio2.4.1NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj
NuGetShouldly4.1.0NuGetTest/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests/Hast.NuGet.Vhdl.Tests.csproj
All dependencies 115

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 14 direct and 101 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetHast.Algorithms3.0.0direct
NuGetHast.Layer3.0.0direct
NuGetHast.Vitis.HardwareFramework1.2.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.CSharp4.4.1direct
NuGetMicrosoft.CSharp4.5.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.CSharp4.7.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk16.5.0direct
NuGetMicrosoft.NET.Test.Sdk18.8.1direct
NuGetShouldly4.1.0direct
NuGetSystem.Memory4.5.1direct
NuGetSystem.Memory4.5.2direct
NuGetSystem.Memory4.5.4direct
NuGetxunit2.4.1direct
NuGetxunit.runner.visualstudio2.4.1direct
NuGetAdvancedDLSupport2.3.0indirect
NuGetAdvancedDLSupport2.3.2indirect
NuGetAdvancedDLSupport3.2.0indirect
NuGetAutofac3.5.2indirect
NuGetAzure.Storage.Blobs12.13.0indirect
NuGetCastle.Core3.3.1indirect
NuGetCastle.Core4.4.1indirect
NuGetCliWrap3.2.0indirect
NuGetCommandLineParser2.4.3indirect
NuGetCommandLineParser2.7.82indirect
NuGetCommandLineParser202.0.0.0indirect
NuGetCsvHelper15.0.0indirect
NuGetHumanizer2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core2.5.16indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.af2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.ar2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.bg2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.bn-BD2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.cs2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.da2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.de2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.el2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.es2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.fa2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.fi-FI2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.fr2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.fr-BE2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.he2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.hr2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.hu2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.id2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.it2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.ja2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.lv2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.nb2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.nb-NO2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.nl2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.pl2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.pt2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.ro2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.ru2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.sk2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.sl2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.sr2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.sr-Latn2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.sv2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.tr2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.uk2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.uz-Cyrl-UZ2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.uz-Latn-UZ2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.vi2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.zh-CN2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.zh-Hans2.5.1indirect
NuGetHumanizer.Core.zh-Hant2.5.1indirect
NuGetIcIWare.NamedIndexers1.0.0indirect
NuGetICSharpCode.Decompiler7.1.0.6543indirect
NuGetIesi.Collections4.0.4indirect
NuGetJsonNet.PrivateSettersContractResolvers.Source0.1.0indirect
NuGetLombiq.Arithmetics0.0.1-alpha.3.hast-175indirect
NuGetLombiq.HelpfulLibraries.Common13.0.0indirect
NuGetLombiq.HelpfulLibraries.RestEase13.0.0indirect
NuGetMedallionTopologicalSort1.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration.CommandLine6.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration.EnvironmentVariables6.0.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration.Json6.0.0indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Configuration.UserSecrets6.0.1indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.FileProviders.Embedded10.0.10indirect
NuGetMicrosoft.Extensions.Logging10.0.10indirect
NuGetMono.DllMap1.0.1indirect
NuGetMoq4.17.2indirect
NuGetMoq.AutoMock3.3.0indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json12.0.1indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.3indirect
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json7.0.1indirect
NuGetNLog4.7.15indirect
NuGetNLog.Extensions.Logging1.7.4indirect
NuGetNUnit2.5.10.11092indirect
NuGetRestEase1.3.3indirect
NuGetRestEase1.5.2indirect
NuGetSixLabors.ImageSharp3.1.12indirect
NuGetStrictEmit2.4.2indirect
NuGetStrictEmit2.5.0indirect
NuGetStrictEmit2.8.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Buffers4.4.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Buffers4.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.CodeDom4.7.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Data.DataSetExtensions4.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Data.SqlClient4.8.1indirect
NuGetSystem.IO.Ports4.7.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Numerics.Vectors4.4.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Numerics.Vectors4.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Reflection.Emit4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Reflection.Emit.ILGeneration4.3.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Runtime.CompilerServices.Unsafe4.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Runtime.CompilerServices.Unsafe4.5.2indirect
NuGetSystem.Runtime.CompilerServices.Unsafe4.7.0indirect
NuGetSystem.ValueTuple4.4.0indirect
NuGetSystem.ValueTuple4.5.0indirect
NuGetSystem.Windows.Forms.DataVisualization1.0.0-prerelease.20110.1indirect
NuGetTerminal.Gui1.4.0indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 115 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
Newtonsoft.Json12.0.1indirecthigh113.0.1
Newtonsoft.Json7.0.1indirecthigh113.0.1
System.Data.SqlClient4.8.1indirecthigh25.1.3

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.