Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-19 20:43 UTC

Pwnzer0tt1 / exploitfarm

ExploitFarm is an attacker and flag submitter for A/D CTF

Python · TypeScriptGPL-3.0★ 55 stars⑂ 11 forkssince May 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryWeb interfacehow this is determined

Pwnzer0tt1/exploitfarm holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (85/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (46/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

75
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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Pwnzer0tt1Organization
43 followers11 public repossince Jun 2022

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIexploitfarm1.7.94,6531060 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume108 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year108
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year16

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~1.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tag1.7.9
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases1.7
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?

48Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
28.1/60Stars55 stars
8.3/25Forks11 forks
1.7/15Watchers3 watchers
Inputs used
forks11
stars55
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
48.9/80Monthly downloads4,653 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesexploitfarm
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads4,653
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?

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 93% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth4 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.932
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
29.2/30PR acceptance37/38 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs37
open_issues0
closed_issues18
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
11.8/25Owner reach43 followers of Pwnzer0tt1
16.1/25Track record11 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers43
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginPwnzer0tt1
public_repos11
account_age_days1,501
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history106 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesexploitfarm
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.eslintrc.cjs
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://pwnzer0tt1.it
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsattack-defense, attacker, ctf, ctf-tools, flag-submitter
has_wikino
homepagehttps://pwnzer0tt1.it
docs_sitehttps://pwnzer0tt1.it
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

52Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate5.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.eslintrc.cjs
11/11Static type checkingfrontend/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesbun.lockb
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsfrontend/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (frontend/tsconfig.json)
51.1/55Manageable file sizes31/440 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes1,603,199
source_files_sampled440
oversized_source_files31

Key facts

55GitHub stars
4contributors
108commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10
5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-19 20:42 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 3/11 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
1Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 1
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 27
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@mantine/charts^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/code-highlight^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/core^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/dates^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/dropzone^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/form^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/hooks^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/modals^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/notifications^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@mantine/nprogress^9.4.1frontend/package.json
npm@monaco-editor/react^4.7.0frontend/package.json
npm@tabler/icons-react^3.44.0frontend/package.json
npm@tanstack/react-query^5.101.2frontend/package.json
npmdayjs^1.11.21frontend/package.json
npmframer-motion^12.42.2frontend/package.json
npmimmer^11.1.11frontend/package.json
npmreact^19.2.7frontend/package.json
npmreact-dom^19.2.7frontend/package.json
npmreact-icons^5.7.0frontend/package.json
npmreact-router^8.2.0frontend/package.json
npmrecharts^3.9.2frontend/package.json
npmsass^1.101.0frontend/package.json
npmshiki^4.3.1frontend/package.json
npmsocket.io-client^4.8.3frontend/package.json
npmurl^0.11.4frontend/package.json
npmuse-immer^0.11.0frontend/package.json
npmzustand^5.0.14frontend/package.json
All dependencies 70

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 27 direct and 43 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@mantine/charts^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/code-highlight^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/core^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/dates^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/dropzone^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/form^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/hooks^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/modals^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/notifications^9.4.1direct
npm@mantine/nprogress^9.4.1direct
npm@monaco-editor/react^4.7.0direct
npm@tabler/icons-react^3.44.0direct
npm@tanstack/react-query^5.101.2direct
npmdayjs^1.11.21direct
npmframer-motion^12.42.2direct
npmimmer^11.1.11direct
npmreact^19.2.7direct
npmreact-dom^19.2.7direct
npmreact-icons^5.7.0direct
npmreact-router^8.2.0direct
npmrecharts^3.9.2direct
npmsass^1.101.0direct
npmshiki^4.3.1direct
npmsocket.io-client^4.8.3direct
npmurl^0.11.4direct
npmuse-immer^0.11.0direct
npmzustand^5.0.14direct
npm@types/jest^30.0.0indirect
npm@types/react^19.2.17indirect
npm@types/react-dom^19.2.3indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin^8.64.0indirect
npm@typescript-eslint/parser^8.64.0indirect
npm@vitejs/plugin-react^6.0.3indirect
npmeslint^10.7.0indirect
npmeslint-plugin-react-hooks^7.1.1indirect
npmeslint-plugin-react-refresh^0.5.3indirect
npmpostcss^8.5.19indirect
npmpostcss-preset-mantine^1.18.0indirect
npmpostcss-simple-vars^7.0.1indirect
npmtypescript^7.0.2indirect
npmvite^8.1.4indirect
PyPIasyncpg0.31.0indirect
PyPIdirhash0.5.0indirect
PyPIexploitfarmindirect
PyPIfastapi0.136.0indirect
PyPIfastapi-pagination0.15.12indirect
PyPIfasteners0.20indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIorjsonindirect
PyPIplatformdirsindirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.1indirect
PyPIpwntoolsindirect
PyPIpydanticindirect
PyPIpyjwt2.13.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.32indirect
PyPIpython-socketioindirect
PyPIredisindirect
PyPIrequestsindirect
PyPIrequests-toolbelt1.0.0indirect
PyPIsqlalchemy2.0.49indirect
PyPIsqlmodel0.0.38indirect
PyPItextualindirect
PyPItoml0.10.2indirect
PyPItyperindirect
PyPItyping-extensionsindirect
PyPIurllib3indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.44.0indirect
PyPIuvloop0.22.1indirect
PyPIxfarmindirect
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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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