Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-23 11:46 UTC

aardvark-community / aardium

Standalone electron based browser package for netcore. Provides additional features such as site screenshots.

F# · JavaScriptApache-2.0★ 1 star⑂ 1 forksince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

aardvark-community/aardium holds a health index of 56 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (72/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (25/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

56
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.

56
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 54 is calibrated to 56 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Aardvark CommunityOrganization
7 followers56 public repossince Oct 2018

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
13.3/18Commit volume29 commits in the last year
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
commits_last_year29
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases16 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~89.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count16
latest_release_tag3.0.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases89.3

Community & Adoption

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

25At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
3.9/15Watchers6 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars1
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.7/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 30% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth32 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled32
top_contributor_share0.303
How it's scored
31.5/42Issue resolution75% of issues closed
0/30PR acceptanceno decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues1
closed_issues3
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.75
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
6.5/25Owner reach7 followers of aardvark-community
24.8/25Track record56 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers7
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginaardvark-community
public_repos56
account_age_days2,911

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

56Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 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-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
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
6.8/7.5Maintained11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-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_aggregate4.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages84
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
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 84 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.

39Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
2.1/40Legible commit history4 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.04
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingF# (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeF# (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/5 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageF#
largest_source_bytes17,110
source_files_sampled5
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

1GitHub stars
32contributors
29commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
16releases
2bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch npm package 'Aardium' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-23 11:45 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
9Maintained11 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 9
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@electron/remote^2.1.3Aardium/package.json
npmelectron-localshortcut^3.2.1Aardium/package.json
npmnode-getopt^0.3.2Aardium/package.json
npmnode-shared-mem^2.1.0Aardium/package.json
npmws^8.21.3Aardium/package.json
All dependencies 84

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 79 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@electron/remote2.1.3direct
npmelectron-localshortcut3.2.1direct
npmnode-getopt0.3.2direct
npmnode-shared-mem2.1.0direct
npmws8.21.3direct
npm@electron-internal/extract-zip1.0.5indirect
npm@electron/asar4.3.0indirect
npm@electron/get5.1.0indirect
npm@electron/notarize3.1.1indirect
npm@electron/osx-sign2.7.0indirect
npm@electron/packager20.3.0indirect
npm@electron/rebuild4.2.0indirect
npm@electron/universal3.0.6indirect
npm@electron/windows-sign2.1.0indirect
npm@isaacs/fs-minipass4.0.1indirect
npm@malept/cross-spawn-promise2.0.0indirect
npm@types/node24.13.6indirect
npm@xmldom/xmldom0.9.12indirect
npmabbrev4.0.0indirect
npmbalanced-match4.0.4indirect
npmbase64-js1.5.1indirect
npmbindings1.5.0indirect
npmbrace-expansion5.0.12indirect
npmchownr3.0.0indirect
npmcommander9.5.0indirect
npmcross-spawn7.0.6indirect
npmdebug4.4.3indirect
npmdotenv17.4.2indirect
npmelectron44.4.5indirect
npmelectron-is-accelerator0.1.2indirect
npmenv-paths2.2.1indirect
npmenv-paths3.0.0indirect
npmerr-code2.0.3indirect
npmexponential-backoff3.1.3indirect
npmfdir6.5.0indirect
npmfile-uri-to-path1.0.0indirect
npmfilename-reserved-regex3.0.0indirect
npmfilenamify6.0.0indirect
npmflora-colossus3.0.2indirect
npmgalactus2.0.2indirect
npmglob13.0.6indirect
npmgraceful-fs4.2.11indirect
npmisbinaryfile4.0.10indirect
npmisexe2.0.0indirect
npmisexe4.0.0indirect
npmjunk4.0.1indirect
npmkeyboardevent-from-electron-accelerator2.0.0indirect
npmkeyboardevents-areequal0.2.2indirect
npmlru-cache11.5.3indirect
npmminimatch10.2.6indirect
npmminipass7.1.3indirect
npmminizlib3.1.0indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmnode-abi4.35.0indirect
npmnode-addon-api8.9.2indirect
npmnode-api-version0.2.1indirect
npmnode-gyp12.4.0indirect
npmnopt9.0.0indirect
npmpath-key3.1.1indirect
npmpath-scurry2.0.2indirect
npmpe-library1.0.1indirect
npmpicomatch4.0.7indirect
npmplist3.1.1indirect
npmpostject1.0.0-alpha.6indirect
npmproc-log6.1.0indirect
npmprogress2.0.3indirect
npmpromise-retry2.0.1indirect
npmread-binary-file-arch1.0.6indirect
npmresedit2.0.3indirect
npmretry0.12.0indirect
npmsemver7.8.5indirect
npmshebang-command2.0.0indirect
npmshebang-regex3.0.0indirect
npmsumchecker3.0.1indirect
npmtar7.5.22indirect
npmtinyglobby0.2.17indirect
npmundici6.28.1indirect
npmundici7.29.1indirect
npmundici-types7.18.2indirect
npmwhich2.0.2indirect
npmwhich6.0.1indirect
npmxmlbuilder15.1.1indirect
npmyallist5.0.0indirect
npmyargs-parser22.0.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 84 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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.