Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-03 11:54 UTC

async-aws / cognito-identity-provider

[READ ONLY] CognitoIdentityProvider client

PHPMIT★ 2 stars⑂ 1 forksince May 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined

async-aws/cognito-identity-provider holds a health index of 48 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Vitality (66/100) and lowest on Security (30/100). It was last updated today. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

48
overall / 100
Weak

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.

48
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 49 is calibrated to 48 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Async AWSOrganization
34 followers62 public repossince Jan 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistasync-aws/cognito-identity-provider1.18.03,9162993 days agoamazonsdkawsasync-awscognito-identity-provider

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

66Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

55Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence — 12/52 weeks with commits
11.1/18Commit volume — 16 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year16
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year12

Release discipline

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 29 releases published
27/36Release recency — latest release 93 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~59.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count29
latest_release_tag1.18.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release93
mean_days_between_releases59.1
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?

30At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

2Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 2 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars2
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

48Weak
How it's scored
47.9/80Monthly downloads — 3,916 downloads/month across packagist
0/20Registry dependents — 0 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesasync-aws/cognito-identity-provider
dependents0
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads128,199
monthly_downloads3,916
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

55Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

61Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 46% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 15 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 57 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled15
top_contributor_share0.458

Issue & PR responsiveness

1Critical
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
0/30PR acceptance — no decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
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): Issue resolution, PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

66Good
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.1/25Owner reach — 34 followers of async-aws
25/25Track record — 62 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers34
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginasync-aws
public_repos62
account_age_days2,437

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 93 days ago
20/20Version history — 29 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesasync-aws/cognito-identity-provider
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish93

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

40Weak
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?

30At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

30At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 57 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 85 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.85
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

44Weak
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — PHP without a type-check config
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 1/171 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes122,659
source_files_sampled171
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

2GitHub stars
15contributors
16commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
29releases
2bus 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

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.0 / 10
3.0aggregate

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 · 2026-10-03 11:54 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 57 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistasync-aws/core^1.9composer.json
All dependencies 6

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 5 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistasync-aws/core—direct
Packagistext-filter—indirect
Packagistphp—indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit—indirect
Packagistsymfony/error-handler—indirect
Packagistsymfony/phpunit-bridge—indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with async-aws/cognito-identity-provider. Read them side by side →

94aws/aws-sdk-phpOfficial repository of the AWS SDK for PHP (@awsforphp)Exceptional96aws/sagemaker-python-sdkA library for training and deploying machine learning models on Amazon SageMakerExceptional96awslabs/iot-app-kitA development library for creating web applications to visualize industrial dataExceptional96amazon-braket/amazon-braket-sdk-pythonA Python SDK for interacting with quantum devices on Amazon BraketExceptional96aws/aws-lambda-rust-runtimeA Rust runtime for AWS LambdaExceptional94aws/agentcore-cliThe terminal experience for AgentCore!Exceptional

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 — Packagist.