Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-18 16:27 UTC

NaverCloudPlatform / ncp-iam-authenticator

a tool for authenticating to a Kubernetes cluster with NCP IAM credentials

GoApache-2.0★ 8 stars⑂ 4 forkssince Nov 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

NaverCloudPlatform/ncp-iam-authenticator holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (67/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (33/100). It was last updated 47 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

53
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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

143 followers61 public repossince Dec 2017

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/NaverCloudPlatform/ncp-iam-authenticatorv1.2.0-447 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

45Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 47 days ago
0.7/36Commit cadence — 1/52 weeks with commits
4.3/18Commit volume — 2 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year2
human_commit_share0.962
days_since_last_push47
active_weeks_last_year1
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 4 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 47 days ago
5.4/27Release cadence — a release every ~462.4 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 4 out of the last 4 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count4
latest_release_tagv1.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release47
mean_days_between_releases462.4

Community & Adoption

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

33At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
13.7/60Stars — 8 stars
4/25Forks — 4 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks4
stars8
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 72% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 6 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.72
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
27.7/30PR acceptance — 12/13 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs12
open_issues0
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs1
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
0/20Verified domain
15.5/25Owner reach — 143 followers of NaverCloudPlatform
25/25Track record — 61 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers143
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginNaverCloudPlatform
public_repos61
account_age_days3,238
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 47 days ago
12/20Version history — 4 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/NaverCloudPlatform/ncp-iam-authenticator
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish47

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

53Moderate · 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
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicskubernetes, ncloud, auth, iam, navercloudplatform
has_wikiyes
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?

56Moderate · 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 — 1 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
0.8/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
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
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 4 out of the last 4 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 27 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate4.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection. 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
advisories35
affected_packages5
assessed_packages41
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 3, unknown 2
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 41 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.

67Good · 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://guide.ncloud-docs.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 23 of 25 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://guide.ncloud-docs.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.92
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 26
8/8Automated maintenance — 1 of the last 26 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
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.038
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/18 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes7,850
source_files_sampled18
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

8GitHub stars
6contributors
2commits, last 12 months
47days since last push
4releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4 ⇿
0Stars
4Forks
3Releases

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.

1223344412022-112024-102026-09
Major 0Minor 1Patch 2

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate

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 · 2026-10-18 16:27 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
0CI-Tests1 out of 12 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 9/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
10Packagingpackaging workflow 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
8Signed-Releases4 out of the last 4 releases have a total of 4 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities27 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/NaverCloudPlatform/ncloud-sdk-go-v2v1.6.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/deiwin/interactv0.0.0-20150409130834-720596b65af8go.mod
Gogithub.com/pkg/errorsv0.9.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/rs/zerologv1.29.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.6.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.8.0go.mod
Gogopkg.in/ini.v1v1.66.3go.mod
Gok8s.io/apimachineryv0.26.1go.mod
Gok8s.io/client-gov0.26.1go.mod
Gosigs.k8s.io/yamlv1.3.0go.mod
All dependencies 41

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 31 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/deiwin/interact0.0.0-20150409130834-720596b65af8direct
Gogithub.com/navercloudplatform/ncloud-sdk-go-v21.6.3direct
Gogithub.com/pkg/errors0.9.1direct
Gogithub.com/rs/zerolog1.29.0direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobra1.6.1direct
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testify1.8.0direct
Gogopkg.in/ini.v11.66.3direct
Gok8s.io/apimachinery0.26.1direct
Gok8s.io/client-go0.26.1direct
Gosigs.k8s.io/yaml1.3.0direct
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spew1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/logr1.2.3indirect
Gogithub.com/gogo/protobuf1.3.2indirect
Gogithub.com/golang/protobuf1.5.2indirect
Gogithub.com/google/gofuzz1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/imdario/mergo0.3.6indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrap1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/json-iterator/go1.1.12indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-colorable0.1.13indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isatty0.0.17indirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/concurrent0.0.0-20180306012644-bacd9c7ef1ddindirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/reflect21.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/onsi/ginkgo1.16.5indirect
Gogithub.com/pmezard/go-difflib1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflag1.0.5indirect
Gogithub.com/stretchr/objx0.4.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/net0.7.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/oauth20.0.0-20220223155221-ee480838109bindirect
Gogolang.org/x/sys0.5.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/term0.5.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/text0.7.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/time0.0.0-20220210224613-90d013bbcef8indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/appengine1.6.7indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobuf1.28.1indirect
Gogopkg.in/inf.v00.9.1indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v22.4.0indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v33.0.1indirect
Gok8s.io/klog/v22.80.1indirect
Gok8s.io/utils0.0.0-20221107191617-1a15be271d1dindirect
Gosigs.k8s.io/json0.0.0-20220713155537-f223a00ba0e2indirect
Gosigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff/v44.2.3indirect
Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 41 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/net0.7.0indirecthigh2812.0.2
golang.org/x/oauth20.0.0-20220223155221-ee480838109bindirecthigh20.27.0
google.golang.org/protobuf1.28.1indirecthigh21.33.0
golang.org/x/sys0.5.0indirectunknown10.44.0
golang.org/x/text0.7.0indirectunknown20.41.0

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 — Go.