Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-21 18:33 UTC

anchore / vunnel

Tool for collecting vulnerability data from various sources (used to build the grype database)

PythonApache-2.0★ 133 stars⑂ 71 forkssince Nov 2022View on GitHub ↗

KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

#vulnerability #grype #data #hacktoberfest

anchore/vunnel holds a health index of 97 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (67/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Exceptional

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.

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)

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 85 is calibrated to 97 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Anchore, Inc.Organization · verified domain

604 followers112 public repossince Dec 2015

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
PyPI	vunnel	0.65.1	3,312	112	0 days ago	aggregator data grype vulnerability vulnerability-data

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

98Exceptional

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 0 days ago
33.9/36	Commit cadence — 49/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 372 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	372
human_commit_share	0.28
days_since_last_push	0
active_weeks_last_year	49

Release discipline

100Exceptional

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~15.6 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	100
latest_release_tag	v0.65.1
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	0
mean_days_between_releases	15.6

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?

67Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

56Moderate

How it's scored

34.4/60	Stars — 133 stars
15.4/25	Forks — 71 forks
6/15	Watchers — 13 watchers

Inputs used

forks	71
stars	133
watchers	13
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

85Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	3
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

59Moderate

How it's scored

46.9/80	Monthly downloads — 3,312 downloads/month across pypi
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	vunnel
dependents	—
ecosystems	pypi
total_downloads	—
monthly_downloads	3,312
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?

78Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

57Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.2/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 32% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 27 contributors
3/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	27
top_contributor_share	0.324

Issue & PR responsiveness

69Good

How it's scored

23.4/42	Issue resolution — 56% of issues closed
24.2/30	PR acceptance — 1,037/1,288 decided PRs merged
6.5/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed

Inputs used

merged_prs	1,037
open_issues	36
closed_issues	45
prs_merged_7d	5
prs_decided_7d	5
prs_merged_30d	15
prs_decided_30d	18
issue_closed_ratio	0.556
closed_unmerged_prs	251
first_time_authors_30d	2
first_time_prs_merged_30d	1
first_time_prs_decided_30d	2

Ownership & stewardship

95Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20	Verified domain
20/25	Owner reach — 604 followers of anchore
25/25	Track record — 112 public repos, account ~10 yr old

Inputs used

followers	604
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	yes
owner_login	anchore
public_repos	112
account_age_days	3,970

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20	Version history — 112 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	vunnel
ecosystems	pypi
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

94Exceptional · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
9.6/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	yes
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	yes

Documentation

85Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 4 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	vulnerability, grype, data, hacktoberfest
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

86Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

82Excellent

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5	Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
0.8/2.5	Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
5/5	Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5	SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5	Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
4.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	16
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	2
scorecard_aggregate	8.2

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	4
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	100
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 1
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 100 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.

71Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt present
40/40	Legible commit history — 28 of 28 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	yes
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

79Good

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile, Taskfile.yaml, tests/quality/Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff]), tox.ini
0/11	Static type checking
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 72 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	uv.lock
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	no
bootstrap_files	Makefile, Taskfile.yaml, tests/quality/Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	—
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.72

Code legibility for models

54Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
54.2/55	Manageable file sizes — 3/216 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Python
largest_source_bytes	214,143
source_files_sampled	216
oversized_source_files	3

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — example

Inputs used

example_dirs	example
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

133GitHub stars

27contributors

372commits, last 12 months

0days since last push

100releases

2bus factor

36open issues

PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
deps.dev does not index pypi:vunnel@0.65.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 71 ⇿

0Stars

71Forks

99Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 50Patch 49

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.2 / 10

8.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-21 18:33 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
4	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10	CI-Tests	30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10	Code-Review	all changesets reviewed
3	Contributors	project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
10	Pinned-Dependencies	all dependencies are pinned
10	SAST	SAST tool is run on all commits
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
10	Token-Permissions	GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6	Vulnerabilities	4 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 20

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
PyPI	click	`<9.0.0,>=8.1.3`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	requests	`<3.0.0,>=2.28.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	colorlog	`<7.0.0,>=6.7.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	PyYAML	`<7.0,>=6.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	ijson	`>=2.5.1,<4.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	xxhash	`<4.0.0,>=3.1.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	cvss	`<4.0,>=2.6`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	python-dateutil	`>=2.8.2,<3.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	defusedxml	`<1.0.0,>=0.7.1`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	orjson	`<4.0.0,>=3.8.6`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	mergedeep	`<2.0.0,>=1.3.4`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	importlib-metadata	`>=7.0.1,<10.0.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	xsdata	`>=26.1,<28.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	pytest-snapshot	`<1.0.0,>=0.9.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	mashumaro	`<4.0,>=3.10`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	iso8601	`<3.0.0,>=2.1.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	zstandard	`>=0.22,<0.26`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	packageurl-python	`<1.0.0,>=0.16.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	oras	`<1.0.0,>=0.1.0`	pyproject.toml
PyPI	sqlalchemy	`>=2.0.43`	pyproject.toml

All dependencies 100

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 20 direct and 80 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
PyPI	click	`8.5.0`	direct
PyPI	colorlog	`6.12.0`	direct
PyPI	cvss	`3.6`	direct
PyPI	defusedxml	`0.7.1`	direct
PyPI	ijson	`3.5.1`	direct
PyPI	importlib-metadata	`9.0.1`	direct
PyPI	iso8601	`2.1.0`	direct
PyPI	mashumaro	`3.23`	direct
PyPI	mergedeep	`1.3.4`	direct
PyPI	oras	`0.2.43`	direct
PyPI	orjson	`3.13.0`	direct
PyPI	packageurl-python	`0.17.6`	direct
PyPI	pytest-snapshot	`0.9.0`	direct
PyPI	python-dateutil	`2.9.0.post0`	direct
PyPI	pyyaml	`6.0.3`	direct
PyPI	requests	`2.34.2`	direct
PyPI	sqlalchemy	`2.1.4`	direct
PyPI	xsdata	`26.1`	direct
PyPI	xxhash	`3.8.1`	direct
PyPI	zstandard	`0.25.0`	direct
PyPI	ast-serialize	`0.11.2`	indirect
PyPI	attrs	`25.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	cachetools	`7.0.5`	indirect
PyPI	certifi	`2026.10.19`	indirect
PyPI	cfgv	`3.5.0`	indirect
PyPI	charset-normalizer	`3.4.4`	indirect
PyPI	colorama	`0.4.6`	indirect
PyPI	coverage	`7.13.2`	indirect
PyPI	dataclass-wizard	`0.39.1`	indirect
PyPI	dataclasses-json	`0.6.7`	indirect
PyPI	distlib	`0.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	dunamai	`1.26.2`	indirect
PyPI	execnet	`2.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	filelock	`3.25.2`	indirect
PyPI	gitdb	`4.0.12`	indirect
PyPI	gitpython	`3.1.62`	indirect
PyPI	hatchling	`1.28.0`	indirect
PyPI	identify	`2.6.16`	indirect
PyPI	idna	`3.15`	indirect
PyPI	iniconfig	`2.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	jinja2	`3.1.6`	indirect
PyPI	jsonschema	`4.26.0`	indirect
PyPI	jsonschema-specifications	`2025.9.1`	indirect
PyPI	librt	`0.16.0`	indirect
PyPI	lxml	`6.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	mando	`0.7.1`	indirect
PyPI	markdown-it-py	`4.0.0`	indirect
PyPI	markupsafe	`3.0.3`	indirect
PyPI	marshmallow	`3.26.2`	indirect
PyPI	mdurl	`0.1.2`	indirect
PyPI	mypy	`2.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	mypy-extensions	`1.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	nodeenv	`1.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	omitempty	`0.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	packaging	`26.0`	indirect
PyPI	pathspec	`1.0.4`	indirect
PyPI	platformdirs	`4.9.4`	indirect
PyPI	pluggy	`1.6.0`	indirect
PyPI	pprintpp	`0.4.0`	indirect
PyPI	pre-commit	`4.6.2`	indirect
PyPI	prompt-toolkit	`3.0.52`	indirect
PyPI	pygments	`2.20.0`	indirect
PyPI	pyproject-api	`1.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest	`9.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-clarity	`1.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-cov	`7.1.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-mock	`3.15.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-picked	`0.5.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-sugar	`1.1.1`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-unordered	`0.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	pytest-xdist	`3.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	python-discovery	`1.6.1`	indirect
PyPI	radon	`6.0.1`	indirect
PyPI	referencing	`0.37.0`	indirect
PyPI	rich	`14.3.2`	indirect
PyPI	rpds-py	`0.30.0`	indirect
PyPI	ruff	`0.14.14`	indirect
PyPI	six	`1.17.0`	indirect
PyPI	smmap	`5.0.2`	indirect
PyPI	tabulate	`0.10.0`	indirect
PyPI	termcolor	`3.3.0`	indirect
PyPI	tomli-w	`1.2.0`	indirect
PyPI	tomlkit	`0.14.0`	indirect
PyPI	toposort	`1.10`	indirect
PyPI	tox	`4.64.10`	indirect
PyPI	tox-uv	`1.36.1`	indirect
PyPI	tox-uv-bare	`1.36.1`	indirect
PyPI	trove-classifiers	`2026.1.14.14`	indirect
PyPI	types-python-dateutil	`2.9.0.20260807`	indirect
PyPI	types-pyyaml	`6.0.12.20260906`	indirect
PyPI	types-requests	`2.33.0.20261006`	indirect
PyPI	typing-extensions	`4.15.0`	indirect
PyPI	typing-inspect	`0.9.0`	indirect
PyPI	urllib3	`2.8.0`	indirect
PyPI	uv	`0.13.4`	indirect
PyPI	uv-dynamic-versioning	`0.14.1`	indirect
PyPI	virtualenv	`21.7.13`	indirect
PyPI	wcwidth	`0.5.3`	indirect
PyPI	yardstick	`0.16.2`	indirect
PyPI	zipp	`3.23.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 100 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
virtualenv	`21.7.13`	indirect	high	4	`21.14.7`

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.

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 — PyPI.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records