Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 12:09 UTC

MaticianInc / file_backed

RustNo license detected★ 3 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Apr 2025View on GitHub ↗

MaticianInc/file_backed holds a health index of 41 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (62/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (27/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Weak

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 44 is calibrated to 41 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Matic Robots, Inc.Organization

43 followers25 public repossince Mar 2018

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
crates.io	file_backed	0.6.14	7,320	23	4 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

39Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

65Good

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 4 days ago
6.9/36	Commit cadence — 10/52 weeks with commits
12.1/18	Commit volume — 21 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	21
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	4
active_weeks_last_year	10

Release discipline

1Critical

How it's scored

0/27	Ships releases — no releases published
0/36	Release recency — no releases
0/27	Release cadence — no releases
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count

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?

27At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

5Critical

How it's scored

4.9/60	Stars — 3 stars
0/25	Forks — 2 forks
0/15	Watchers — 1 watchers

Inputs used

forks	2
stars	3
watchers	1
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

25At Risk

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
0/22.5	License — no license file detected
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	no
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

64Moderate

How it's scored

51.5/80	Monthly downloads — 7,320 downloads/month across crates
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	file_backed
dependents	—
ecosystems	crates
total_downloads	93,128
monthly_downloads	7,320
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

12Critical

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.4/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 98% of commits
2.7/13.5	Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	2
top_contributor_share	0.983

Issue & PR responsiveness

71Good

How it's scored

42/42	Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
20/30	PR acceptance — 4/6 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	4
open_issues	0
closed_issues	2
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	1
closed_unmerged_prs	2
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): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

64Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain
11.8/25	Owner reach — 43 followers of MaticianInc
22.3/25	Track record — 25 public repos, account ~8 yr old

Inputs used

followers	43
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	no
owner_login	MaticianInc
public_repos	25
account_age_days	3,092

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 4 days ago
20/20	Version history — 23 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	file_backed
ecosystems	crates
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	4

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

44Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

44Weak

How it's scored

0/24	CI workflows
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	no
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

45Weak

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/file_backed
0/10	Repository description
0/10	Topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	—
has_wiki	no
homepage	—
docs_site	https://docs.rs/file_backed
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	no

Security

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

44Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

34At Risk

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
0/2.5	License — license file not detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — no data
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 — no data
6/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	13
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	5
scorecard_aggregate	3.4

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

83Excellent

How it's scored

24.7/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 2 affected: anyhow 1.0.100 (unknown), bincode 2.0.1 (unknown)
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
37.2/40	No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 272 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	2
affected_packages	2
assessed_packages	99
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	unknown 2
direct_affected_packages	2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 99 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.

62Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

11Critical

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
11/40	Legible commit history — 12 of 58 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.207
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

73Good

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10	Demonstrated agent practice — 8 of the last 58 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	Cargo.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0.138
toolchain_manifests	Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

94Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
49.5/55	Manageable file sizes — 1/10 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Rust
largest_source_bytes	100,867
source_files_sampled	10
oversized_source_files	1

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
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

3GitHub stars

2contributors

21commits, last 12 months

4days since last push

0releases

1bus factor

0open 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 ★ / 2 ⇿

0Stars

2Forks

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.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.4 / 10

3.4aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 12:09 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
0	Branch-Protection	branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10	CI-Tests	1 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0	Contributors	project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/a	Dangerous-Workflow	no workflows found
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
0	License	license file not detected
10	Maintained	13 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
n/a	Pinned-Dependencies	no dependencies found
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
n/a	Token-Permissions	No tokens found
8	Vulnerabilities	2 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 16

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
crates.io	consume_on_drop	`0.1.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	cutoff_list	`0.2.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	dashmap	`6.1.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	get_mut_drop_weak	`0.2.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	log	`0.4.27`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	parking_lot	`0.12.3`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tokio	`>= 1.44.2, <= 1.52`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tokio-util	`0.7.15`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	uuid	`1.16.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	anyhow	`1.0.98`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	nix	`0.30.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	walkdir	`2.5.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	bincode	`2.0.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	serde	`1.0.219`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	prost	`>= 0.13, <= 0.14`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	redb	`4.1.0`	Cargo.toml

All dependencies 99

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 16 direct and 83 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
crates.io	anyhow	`1.0.100`	direct
crates.io	bincode	`2.0.1`	direct
crates.io	consume_on_drop	`0.1.1`	direct
crates.io	cutoff_list	`0.2.0`	direct
crates.io	dashmap	`6.1.0`	direct
crates.io	get_mut_drop_weak	`0.2.0`	direct
crates.io	log	`0.4.28`	direct
crates.io	nix	`0.30.1`	direct
crates.io	parking_lot	`0.12.4`	direct
crates.io	prost	`0.14.1`	direct
crates.io	redb	`4.1.0`	direct
crates.io	serde	`1.0.228`	direct
crates.io	tokio	`1.47.1`	direct
crates.io	tokio-util	`0.7.16`	direct
crates.io	uuid	`1.18.1`	direct
crates.io	walkdir	`2.5.0`	direct
crates.io	addr2line	`0.25.1`	indirect
crates.io	adler2	`2.0.1`	indirect
crates.io	autocfg	`1.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	backtrace	`0.3.76`	indirect
crates.io	bincode_derive	`2.0.1`	indirect
crates.io	bitflags	`2.9.4`	indirect
crates.io	bumpalo	`3.19.0`	indirect
crates.io	bytes	`1.11.1`	indirect
crates.io	cfg-if	`1.0.3`	indirect
crates.io	cfg_aliases	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	crossbeam-utils	`0.8.21`	indirect
crates.io	either	`1.15.0`	indirect
crates.io	errno	`0.3.14`	indirect
crates.io	fastrand	`2.3.0`	indirect
crates.io	futures	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-channel	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-core	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-executor	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-io	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-macro	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-sink	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-task	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	futures-util	`0.3.31`	indirect
crates.io	getrandom	`0.3.3`	indirect
crates.io	gimli	`0.32.3`	indirect
crates.io	hashbrown	`0.14.5`	indirect
crates.io	index_list	`0.2.17`	indirect
crates.io	io-uring	`0.7.10`	indirect
crates.io	itertools	`0.14.0`	indirect
crates.io	js-sys	`0.3.81`	indirect
crates.io	libc	`0.2.176`	indirect
crates.io	linux-raw-sys	`0.11.0`	indirect
crates.io	lock_api	`0.4.13`	indirect
crates.io	memchr	`2.7.6`	indirect
crates.io	miniz_oxide	`0.8.9`	indirect
crates.io	mio	`1.0.4`	indirect
crates.io	object	`0.37.3`	indirect
crates.io	once_cell	`1.21.3`	indirect
crates.io	parking_lot_core	`0.9.11`	indirect
crates.io	pin-project-lite	`0.2.16`	indirect
crates.io	pin-utils	`0.1.0`	indirect
crates.io	proc-macro2	`1.0.101`	indirect
crates.io	prost-derive	`0.14.1`	indirect
crates.io	quote	`1.0.41`	indirect
crates.io	r-efi	`5.3.0`	indirect
crates.io	redox_syscall	`0.5.17`	indirect
crates.io	rustc-demangle	`0.1.26`	indirect
crates.io	rustix	`1.1.2`	indirect
crates.io	rustversion	`1.0.22`	indirect
crates.io	same-file	`1.0.6`	indirect
crates.io	scopeguard	`1.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	serde_core	`1.0.228`	indirect
crates.io	serde_derive	`1.0.228`	indirect
crates.io	slab	`0.4.11`	indirect
crates.io	smallvec	`1.15.1`	indirect
crates.io	syn	`2.0.106`	indirect
crates.io	tempfile	`3.23.0`	indirect
crates.io	tokio-macros	`2.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	unicode-ident	`1.0.19`	indirect
crates.io	unty	`0.0.4`	indirect
crates.io	virtue	`0.0.18`	indirect
crates.io	wasi	`0.11.1+wasi-snapshot-preview1`	indirect
crates.io	wasi	`0.14.7+wasi-0.2.4`	indirect
crates.io	wasip2	`1.0.1+wasi-0.2.4`	indirect
crates.io	wasm-bindgen	`0.2.104`	indirect
crates.io	wasm-bindgen-backend	`0.2.104`	indirect
crates.io	wasm-bindgen-macro	`0.2.104`	indirect
crates.io	wasm-bindgen-macro-support	`0.2.104`	indirect
crates.io	wasm-bindgen-shared	`0.2.104`	indirect
crates.io	winapi-util	`0.1.11`	indirect
crates.io	windows-link	`0.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows-sys	`0.59.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows-sys	`0.61.1`	indirect
crates.io	windows-targets	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_gnu	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnu	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	wit-bindgen	`0.46.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 99 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
anyhow	`1.0.100`	direct	unknown	1	`1.0.103`
bincode	`2.0.1`	direct	unknown	1	—

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 — crates.io.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records