Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 18:30 UTC

Spomky-Labs / pki-framework

Public Key Infrastructure

PHPMIT★ 31 stars⑂ 6 forkssince Jul 2022View on GitHub ↗

Spomky-Labs/pki-framework holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (69/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (51/100). It was last updated 21 days ago. 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

Spomky-LabsOrganization · verified domain
46 followers42 public repossince Feb 2014

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 21 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence10/52 weeks with commits
11.5/18Commit volume18 commits in the last year
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained6 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
commits_last_year18
human_commit_share0.72
days_since_last_push21
active_weeks_last_year10
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases14 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 21 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~95.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tag1.6.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release21
mean_days_between_releases95.4
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?

66Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
24/60Stars31 stars
5.8/25Forks6 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks6
stars31
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
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_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads5,906,367 downloads/month across packagist
6.7/20Registry dependents9 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesspomky-labs/pki-framework
dependents9
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads45,997,016
monthly_downloads5,906,367
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 96% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth5 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.955
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
19.9/30PR acceptance57/86 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs57
open_issues0
closed_issues4
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs29
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 backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
12/25Owner reach46 followers of Spomky-Labs
23.9/25Track record42 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers46
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginSpomky-Labs
public_repos42
account_age_days4,571

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 21 days ago
20/20Version history14 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesspomky-labs/pki-framework
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish21

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configphpstan.neon
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
12/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests19 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
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?

59Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1.5/2.5CI-Tests19 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
4.5/7.5Maintained6 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
2/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. 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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
29.6/40Legible commit history40 of 72 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.556
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configphpstan.neon
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance28 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.28
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/638 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes21,361
source_files_sampled638
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

31GitHub stars
5contributors
18commits, last 12 months
21days since last push
14releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 6 ⇿
0Stars
6Forks
6Releases

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.

123456612024-122025-092026-07
Major 0Minor 2Patch 4

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 18:30 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
6CI-Tests19 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 5/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
6Maintained6 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 6
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistbrick/math^0.10|^0.11|^0.12|^0.13|^0.14|^0.15|^0.16|^0.17|^0.18|^0.19composer.json
All dependencies 19

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 18 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistbrick/mathdirect
Packagistekino/phpstan-banned-codeindirect
Packagistext-gmpindirect
Packagistext-mbstringindirect
Packagistext-opensslindirect
Packagistinfection/infectionindirect
Packagistphpindirect
Packagistphp-parallel-lint/php-parallel-lintindirect
Packagistphpstan/extension-installerindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstanindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-deprecation-rulesindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-phpunitindirect
Packagistphpstan/phpstan-strict-rulesindirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunitindirect
Packagistrector/rectorindirect
Packagistroave/security-advisoriesindirect
Packagistsymfony/stringindirect
Packagistsymfony/var-dumperindirect
Packagistsymplify/easy-coding-standardindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 statisticsPackagist.