Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-02 02:48 UTC

canove / whaileys

Send and receive messages as WhatsApp web on Nodejs

JavaScriptNo license detected★ 107 stars⑂ 81 forkssince Sep 2025View on GitHub ↗

canove/whaileys holds a health index of 73 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (77/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (47/100). It was last updated 34 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

73
overall / 100
Good

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.

73
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 64 is calibrated to 73 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Cassio SantosPersonal account
498 followers6 public repossince Dec 2016Economicros

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmwhaileys6.5.19,2243734 days agowhatsappjs-whatsappwhatsapp-apiwhatsapp-webwhatsapp-chatwhatsapp-groupautomationmulti-device
npmwhatsapp-web-protobuf-extractor1.0.021570 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

77Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 34 days ago
15.2/36Commit cadence22/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume191 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained17 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year191
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push34
active_weeks_last_year22

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases43 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 34 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~22 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count43
latest_release_tagv6.5.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release34
mean_days_between_releases22
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?

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
32.9/60Stars107 stars
15.9/25Forks81 forks
5.3/15Watchers10 watchers
Inputs used
forks81
stars107
watchers10
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
0/22.5Licenseno license file detected
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseno
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
52.9/80Monthly downloads9,224 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageswhaileys
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads9,224
unverified_packages_excludedwhatsapp-web-protobuf-extractor
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?

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 63% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.628
How it's scored
34.6/42Issue resolution82% of issues closed
26.5/30PR acceptance68/77 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 7/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs68
open_issues3
closed_issues14
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.824
closed_unmerged_prs9
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
19.4/25Owner reach498 followers of canove
18.2/25Track record6 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers498
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logincanove
public_repos6
account_age_days3,534
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable2 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 34 days ago
20/20Version history37 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageswhaileys, whatsapp-web-protobuf-extractor
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish34

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.eslintrc.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests16 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

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?

55Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3.8/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests16 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 7/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0/2.5Licenselicense file not detected
7.5/7.5Maintained17 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
1.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities101 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
9.2/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: axios 0.24.0 (high 8.6), music-metadata 7.14.0 (high 7.5)
14.4/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: file-type 16.5.4 (moderate 5.3)
26.1/40No advisories left outstanding3 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,028 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories25
affected_packages3
assessed_packages134
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages2
Matched the npm:whaileys@6.5.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 134 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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
36.3/40Legible commit history68 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.68
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.eslintrc.json
11/11Static type checkingtsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json, yarn.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configstsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript with type-check config (tsconfig.json)
52.9/55Manageable file sizes3/79 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes9,598,279
source_files_sampled79
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)WAProto/WAProto.proto, WASignalGroup/group.proto
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexample
Inputs used
example_dirsexample
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesWAProto/WAProto.proto, WASignalGroup/group.proto
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

107GitHub stars
98contributors
191commits, last 12 months
34days since last push
43releases
1bus factor
3open 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 ★ / 81 ⇿
0Stars
81Forks
43Releases

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.

013253850637575122025-092026-032026-08
Major 0Minor 4Patch 39
OpenSSF Scorecard 5.6 / 10
5.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-02 02:48 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
9CI-Tests16 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 7/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
0Licenselicense file not detected
10Maintained17 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
8Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities101 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 17
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@hapi/boom^9.1.3package.json
npmaxios^0.24.0package.json
npmfutoin-hkdf^1.5.0package.json
npmlibsignalgithub:canove/libsignal-node#105ad38dc8d7668b5d5e3688e710915bef5cdc7fpackage.json
npmlodash^4.17.21package.json
npmmusic-metadata^7.12.3package.json
npmnode-cache^5.1.2package.json
npmogg-opus-decoder^1.7.1package.json
npmpino^7.0.0package.json
npmprotobufjs^7.4.0package.json
npmprotobufjs-cli^1.1.3package.json
npmws^8.0.0package.json
npmacorn^8.15.0proto-extract/package.json
npmacorn-walk^8.3.4proto-extract/package.json
npmrequest^2.88.0proto-extract/package.json
npmrequest-promise-core^1.1.2proto-extract/package.json
npmrequest-promise-native^1.0.7proto-extract/package.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 3

Installing npm:whaileys@6.5.1 pulls in 134 packages, direct and transitive: 3 carry known advisories, of which 2 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
axios0.24.0directhigh231.18.0
music-metadata7.14.0directhigh111.12.3
file-type16.5.4indirectmoderate121.3.1

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 statisticsnpm.