Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 12:27 UTC

VenusProtocol / venus-protocol

BNB Smart Chain Venus Protocol

TypeScript · SolidityBSD-3-Clause★ 277 stars⑂ 200 forkssince Sep 2020View on GitHub ↗

VenusProtocol/venus-protocol holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (80/100) and lowest on Security (25/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

34
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

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)
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). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

Venus ProtocolOrganization
208 followers19 public repossince Jan 2021

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npm@venusprotocol/venus-protocol10.3.010,47326068 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 5 days ago
29.1/36Commit cadence — 42/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 603 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year603
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year42
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 3 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 1,459 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~316.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count3
latest_release_tagvip-60
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,459
mean_days_between_releases316.5
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?

75Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
39.6/60Stars — 277 stars
19.2/25Forks — 200 forks
6.8/15Watchers — 18 watchers
Inputs used
forks200
stars277
watchers18
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
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
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
53.6/80Monthly downloads — 10,473 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@venusprotocol/venus-protocol
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads10,473
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?

76Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 21% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 29 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled29
top_contributor_share0.21
How it's scored
31.1/42Issue resolution — 74% of issues closed
25.1/30PR acceptance — 536/641 decided PRs merged
4.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs536
open_issues13
closed_issues37
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.74
closed_unmerged_prs105
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
16.7/25Owner reach — 208 followers of VenusProtocol
20.8/25Track record — 19 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers208
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginVenusProtocol
public_repos19
account_age_days2,068

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 68 days ago
20/20Version history — 260 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@venusprotocol/venus-protocol
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish68

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 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 3/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 150 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.8
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier50
security_posture_after_multiplier24
security_posture_before_jurisdiction48
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.
How it's scored
16.8/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: @openzeppelin/contracts 4.9.3 (moderate 6.5)
1.5/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 14 affected: @openzeppelin/contracts 3.4.2-solc-0.7 (critical 10.0), @openzeppelin/contracts-upgradeable 3.4.2-solc-0.7 (critical 10.0), @openzeppelin/contracts 3.4.2 (high 7.5), +11 more
11.1/40No advisories left outstanding — 14 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,840 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories68
affected_packages15
assessed_packages504
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 11, moderate 1, low 1
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the npm:@venusprotocol/venus-protocol@10.3.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 504 packages. 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://docs.venus.io/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 97 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.venus.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.97
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc
11/11Static type checking — tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 7 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesyarn.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0.07
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — TypeScript (statically typed)
53.4/55Manageable file sizes — 8/270 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes2,168,472
source_files_sampled270
oversized_source_files8

Key facts

277GitHub stars
29contributors
603commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
3releases
3bus factor
13open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 200 ⇿
0Stars
200Forks
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.

0408012016020019252020-102023-092026-07
Major 0Minor 0Patch 2

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10
4.8aggregate

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 12:26 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
10CI-Tests3 out of 3 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 3/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities150 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@nomicfoundation/hardhat-ethers^3.0.0package.json
npm@openzeppelin/contracts4.9.3package.json
npm@openzeppelin/contracts-upgradeable^4.8.0package.json
npm@venusprotocol/governance-contracts^2.13.0package.json
npm@venusprotocol/protocol-reserve^3.4.0package.json
npm@venusprotocol/solidity-utilities^2.1.0package.json
npm@venusprotocol/token-bridge^2.7.0package.json
npmbignumber.js^9.1.2package.json
npmdotenv^16.0.1package.json
npmmodule-alias^2.2.2package.json
npmpatch-package^8.0.0package.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

Dependency advisories 15

Installing npm:@venusprotocol/venus-protocol@10.3.0 pulls in 504 packages, direct and transitive: 15 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
@openzeppelin/contracts3.4.2-solc-0.7indirectcritical54.8.3
@openzeppelin/contracts-upgradeable3.4.2-solc-0.7indirectcritical44.8.3
@openzeppelin/contracts3.4.2indirecthigh44.8.3
adm-zip0.4.16indirecthigh10.6.0
axios0.21.4indirecthigh231.18.0
elliptic6.5.4indirecthigh76.6.1
elliptic6.6.1indirecthigh1—
serialize-javascript6.0.2indirecthigh27.0.5
tmp0.0.33indirecthigh20.2.6
undici5.29.0indirecthigh128.9.0
uuid8.3.2indirecthigh113.0.1
ws7.4.6indirecthigh28.21.0
ws8.18.0indirecthigh28.21.0
@openzeppelin/contracts4.9.3directmoderate15.0.2
cookie0.4.2indirectlow10.7.0

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 — npm.