Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-13 00:49 UTC

auth0 / ruby-auth0

Ruby toolkit for Auth0 API

RubyMIT★ 205 stars⑂ 148 forkssince Jun 2014View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

auth0/ruby-auth0 holds a health index of 96 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (60/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 7 contributors account for most of its recent work.

96
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.

96
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 84 is calibrated to 96 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Auth0Organization · verified domain
2,122 followers346 public repossince Nov 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemsauth06.2.0-7110 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

93Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
23.5/36Commit cadence — 34/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 223 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year223
human_commit_share0.83
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year34

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 51 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 10 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~13 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count51
latest_release_tagv6.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release10
mean_days_between_releases13
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?

82Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
37.5/60Stars — 205 stars
18.1/25Forks — 148 forks
11.1/15Watchers — 99 watchers
Inputs used
forks148
stars205
watchers99
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 (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_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, codecov.io, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
72.1/80Total downloads — 8,635,589 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesauth0
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads8,635,589
monthly_downloads—
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?

94Exceptional · 23% of overall
How it's scored
51.3/54Bus factor — 7 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 18% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 94 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 27 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor7
contributors_sampled94
top_contributor_share0.179
How it's scored
37.9/42Issue resolution — 90% of issues closed
23.3/30PR acceptance — 533/685 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs533
open_issues10
closed_issues92
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.902
closed_unmerged_prs152
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
23.9/25Owner reach — 2,122 followers of auth0
25/25Track record — 346 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers2,122
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginauth0
public_repos346
account_age_days5,047

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 10 days ago
20/20Version history — 71 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesauth0
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish10

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 27 out of 27 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
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://auth0.com/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdx-sdk, ruby, authentication
has_wikino
homepagehttps://auth0.com/
docs_sitehttps://auth0.com/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

74Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 27 out of 27 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
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 27 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
1/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 10 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories12
affected_packages5
assessed_packages59
unassessed_packages5
affected_by_severityhigh 5
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 59 resolved dependencies against OSV. 5 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

60Moderate · 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://auth0.com/llms.txt)
37.9/40Legible commit history — 59 of 83 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://auth0.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.711
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 7 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
2/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.07
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 1/4,375 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes335,013
source_files_sampled4,375
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
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

205GitHub stars
94contributors
223commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
51releases
7bus factor
10open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 148 ⇿
0Stars
148Forks
50Releases

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.

025507510012515014542014-082020-082026-08
Major 2Minor 36Patch 6

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.7 / 10
6.7aggregate

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 · 2026-09-13 00:49 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 27 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained26 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
2Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities10 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 64

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 64 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsaddressable2.8.9indirect
RubyGemsaddressable2.9.0indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsauth0—indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.0.1indirect
RubyGemscoderay1.1.3indirect
RubyGemscrack1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsdomain_name0.6.20240107indirect
RubyGemsdotenv3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsdotenv-rails—indirect
RubyGemshashdiff1.2.1indirect
RubyGemshttp-accept1.7.0indirect
RubyGemshttp-cookie1.1.0indirect
RubyGemshttp-cookie1.1.6indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsjson2.19.1indirect
RubyGemsjson-schema6.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjwt—indirect
RubyGemsjwt2.10.2indirect
RubyGemsjwt2.10.3indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.5indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmcp0.8.0indirect
RubyGemsmethod_source1.1.0indirect
RubyGemsmime-types3.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmime-types-data3.2026.0303indirect
RubyGemsmime-types-data3.2026.0414indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.27.0indirect
RubyGemsminitest-rg5.4.0indirect
RubyGemsmustermann3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsnetrc0.11.0indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.7.5indirect
RubyGemsparallel1.27.0indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.10.2indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemspry0.16.0indirect
RubyGemspublic_suffix7.0.5indirect
RubyGemspuma—indirect
RubyGemspuma6.6.1indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.2.6indirect
RubyGemsrack-protection4.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.1.2indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.3.1indirect
RubyGemsrails—indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake13.3.1indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.11.3indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsrest-client2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsretryable3.0.5indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.85.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.49.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-minitest0.39.1indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssinatra4.2.1indirect
RubyGemstilt2.7.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemswebmock3.26.1indirect
RubyGemszache0.15.2indirect
Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 59 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 5 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
addressable2.8.9indirecthigh12.9.0
json2.19.1indirecthigh22.19.9
jwt2.10.2indirecthigh13.2.0
mcp0.8.0indirecthigh60.23.0
puma6.6.1indirecthigh28.0.2

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 — RubyGems.