# caspermeijn/prost — health index 42/100 (At risk)

> Inspection of the public repository caspermeijn/prost by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 42 out of 100, placing it in the At risk band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/caspermeijn/prost
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/caspermeijn/prost
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/caspermeijn/prost/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/c/caspermeijn/prost.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-26
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.27.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 37/100 | At risk |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 34/100 | At risk |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 47/100 | At risk |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 36/100 | At risk |
| Security | 16% | 58/100 | Moderate |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 58/100 | Moderate |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | PROST! a Protocol Buffers implementation for the Rust Language |
| Primary language | Rust |
| License | Apache-2.0 |
| Stars | 0 |
| Forks | 0 |
| Created | 2023-11-23 |
| Last push | 2026-07-05 |
| Latest release | v0.13.4 |
| Commits (last year) | 0 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Fork | yes |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| crates | prost | 0.14.4 | 40,093,253 |
| crates | protobuf | 3.7.2 | 12,090,138 |
| crates | conformance | 0.2.0 | 6 |
| crates | prost-build | 0.14.4 | 22,054,618 |
| crates | prost-types | 0.14.4 | 29,327,814 |
| crates | prost-derive | 0.14.4 | 38,534,055 |

## Vitality — 37/100 (At risk)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 29/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | partial | 28.8 / 36 | last push 21 days ago |
| Commit cadence | not met | 0 / 36 | 0/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | not met | 0 / 18 | 0 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | not met | 0 / 10 | 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |

### Release discipline — 48/100 (At risk)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | partial | 16.2 / 27 | 2 version tags (no GitHub releases) |
| Release recency | partial | 7.2 / 36 | latest release 597 days ago |
| Release cadence | partial | 19.8 / 27 | a release every ~97.8 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | no releases found |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | no human commit for 673 days, with nothing left unanswered; held at dormant by nothing open to answer, no affected dependency |

## Community & Adoption — 34/100 (At risk)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 1/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | not met | 0 / 60 | 0 stars |
| Forks | not met | 0 / 25 | 0 forks |
| Watchers | not met | 0 / 15 | 0 watchers |

### Community health — 25/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | not met | 0 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (Apache-2.0) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 100/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | met | 80 / 80 | 12,090,138 downloads/month across crates |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 47/100 (At risk)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 43/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 10.9 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 51% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 99 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 20 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 1/100 (Critical)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | excluded | 0 / 46.8 | no issues or no data |
| PR acceptance | not met | 0 / 38.2 | 0/10 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | not met | 0 / 15 | Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 54/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | partial | 10 / 30 | personal (user) account |
| Verified domain | excluded | 0 / 20 | not applicable to user accounts |
| Owner reach | partial | 8.2 / 25 | 13 followers of caspermeijn |
| Track record | met | 25 / 25 | 105 public repos, account ~14 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 1 package(s) on crates |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 16 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 177 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 36/100 (At risk)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 60/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 2 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | not met | 0 / 16 | — |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | excluded | 0 / 20 | no pull request found |

### Documentation — 1/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | not met | 0 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | not met | 0 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Repository description | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Topics | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Wiki | not met | 0 / 10 | — |

## Security — 58/100 (Moderate)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 47/100 (At risk)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | not met | 0 / 7.5 | branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| CI-Tests | excluded | 0 / 2.5 | no pull request found |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0 |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 20 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | met | 5 / 5 | project is fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0 |
| Packaging | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | no SAST tool detected |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not detected |
| Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | no releases found |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 0 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 100/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the crates:prost@0.14.4 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 62 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | met | 35 / 35 | no direct dependency carries a known advisory |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | met | 25 / 25 | no indirect dependency carries a known advisory |
| No advisories left outstanding | excluded | 0 / 40 | no advisory carries a publication date |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 58/100 (Moderate)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 40/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | not met | 0 / 45 | no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | met | 40 / 40 | 94 of 94 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 64/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | partial | 12.6 / 18 | Cargo.toml, benchmarks/Cargo.toml, conformance/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner) |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | not met | 0 / 11 | — |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | Rust (statically typed) |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | devcontainer, Nix |
| Demonstrated agent practice | not met | 0 / 10 | no agent-authored commits among the last 100 |
| Automated maintenance | met | 8 / 8 | 6 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | not met | 0 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0 |

### Code legibility for models — 99/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Rust (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 54.3 / 55 | 1/84 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 40/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | prost-build/src/fixtures/alphabet/a.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/alphabet/b.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/alphabet/c.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/alphabet/d.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/alphabet/e.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/alphabet/f.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/field_attributes/field_attributes.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/helloworld/goodbye.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/helloworld/hello.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/helloworld/types.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/imports_empty/imports_empty.proto, prost-build/src/fixtures/smoke_test/smoke_test.proto, tests/single-include/protos/outdir.proto, tests/single-include/protos/search.proto, tests/src/boxed_field.proto, tests/src/custom_attributes.proto, tests/src/custom_debug.proto, tests/src/default_enum_value.proto, tests/src/default_string_escape.proto, tests/src/deprecated_field.proto, tests/src/derive_copy.proto, tests/src/enum_keyword_variant.proto, tests/src/groups.proto, tests/src/ident_conversion.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/any.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/api.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/compiler/plugin.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/descriptor.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/duration.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/empty.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/field_mask.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/source_context.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/struct.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/timestamp.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/type.proto, tests/src/include/google/protobuf/wrappers.proto, tests/src/invalid_doctest.proto, tests/src/nesting.proto, tests/src/no_package.proto, tests/src/no_root_packages/gizmo.proto, tests/src/no_root_packages/root.proto, tests/src/no_root_packages/widget.proto, tests/src/no_root_packages/widget_factory.proto, tests/src/no_shadowed_types.proto, tests/src/no_unused_results.proto, tests/src/oneof_attributes.proto, tests/src/option_enum.proto, tests/src/option_struct.proto, tests/src/packages/gizmo.proto, tests/src/packages/root.proto, tests/src/packages/widget.proto, tests/src/packages/widget_factory.proto, tests/src/proto3_presence.proto, tests/src/recursive_oneof.proto, tests/src/result_enum.proto, tests/src/result_struct.proto, tests/src/submessage_without_package.proto, tests/src/type_names.proto, tests/src/well_known_types.proto, third_party/old_protobuf_benchmarks/benchmarks.proto, third_party/old_protobuf_benchmarks/datasets/google_message1/proto2/benchmark_message1_proto2.proto, third_party/old_protobuf_benchmarks/datasets/google_message1/proto3/benchmark_message1_proto3.proto, third_party/old_protobuf_benchmarks/datasets/google_message2/benchmark_message2.proto |
| MCP server | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | not met | 0 / 40 | — |

## Collection warnings

- Community profile unavailable
- crates package 'prost' points at a different repository (https://github.com/tokio-rs/prost); excluded from ecosystem scoring
- Could not fetch crates package 'tests-2015' from its registry
- Could not fetch crates package 'tests-2018' from its registry
- crates package 'conformance' points at a different repository (https://github.com/CAD97/tinyc/tree/master/crates/conformance); excluded from ecosystem scoring
- crates package 'prost-build' points at a different repository (https://github.com/tokio-rs/prost); excluded from ecosystem scoring
- crates package 'prost-types' points at a different repository (https://github.com/tokio-rs/prost); excluded from ecosystem scoring
- crates package 'prost-derive' points at a different repository (https://github.com/tokio-rs/prost); excluded from ecosystem scoring
- GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt