Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-09 07:10 UTC

cloudflare / svg-hush

Make it safe to serve untrusted SVG files

RustMIT★ 425 stars⑂ 23 forkssince Jul 2022View on GitHub ↗

cloudflare/svg-hush holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (74/100) and lowest on Vitality (44/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

CloudflareOrganization
15,322 followers573 public repossince Jun 2010

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iosvg-hush0.9.724,89182 days agofiltersecuritysanitizerxsspurify

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

44Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 2 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
5.4/18Commit volume3 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year3
human_commit_share0.971
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases2 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 533 days ago
5.4/27Release cadencea release every ~931.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tag0.9.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release533
mean_days_between_releases931.5
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?

72Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
42.6/60Stars425 stars
11.2/25Forks23 forks
5.6/15Watchers11 watchers
Inputs used
forks23
stars425
watchers11
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
58.6/80Monthly downloads24,891 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessvg-hush
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads242,638
monthly_downloads24,891
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?

74Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 78% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth5 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.781
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
23.3/30PR acceptance7/9 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 4/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs7
open_issues0
closed_issues5
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs2
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
25/25Owner reach15,322 followers of cloudflare
25/25Track record573 public repos, account ~16 yr old
Inputs used
followers15,322
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logincloudflare
public_repos573
account_age_days5,889
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history8 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessvg-hush
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests2 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/svg-hush
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssanitizer, security, svg, xss-filter
has_wikino
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/svg-hush
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

69Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0.5/2.5CI-Tests2 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 4/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.1
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 advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages17
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the crates:svg-hush@0.9.7 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 17 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.

55Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
14.5/40Legible commit history9 of 33 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.273
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapfuzz/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 34
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 34 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesfuzz/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.029
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/8 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes25,514
source_files_sampled8
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

425GitHub stars
5contributors
3commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
2releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 23 ⇿
0Stars
23Forks
2Releases

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.

48121620242242022-072024-072026-07
Major 0Minor 1Patch 1

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
6.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-09 07:10 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2CI-Tests2 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 4/25 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is 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
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 5
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iodata-url0.3.2Cargo.toml
crates.iobase64>=0.22.1, <0.24Cargo.toml
crates.ioquick-error2.0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iourl2.5.8Cargo.toml
crates.ioxml1.4Cargo.toml
All dependencies 84

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 8 direct and 76 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iobase640.22.1direct
crates.iobase640.23.1direct
crates.iodata-url0.3.1direct
crates.iodata-url0.3.2direct
crates.ioquick-error2.0.1direct
crates.iourl2.5.4direct
crates.iourl2.5.8direct
crates.ioxml1.4.0direct
crates.ioarbitrary1.4.1indirect
crates.iocc1.2.15indirect
crates.iodisplaydoc0.2.5indirect
crates.ioform_urlencoded1.2.1indirect
crates.ioform_urlencoded1.2.2indirect
crates.ioicu_collections1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_collections2.1.1indirect
crates.ioicu_locale_core2.1.1indirect
crates.ioicu_locid1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_locid_transform1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_locid_transform_data1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_normalizer1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_normalizer2.1.1indirect
crates.ioicu_normalizer_data1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_normalizer_data2.1.1indirect
crates.ioicu_properties1.5.1indirect
crates.ioicu_properties2.1.2indirect
crates.ioicu_properties_data1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_properties_data2.1.2indirect
crates.ioicu_provider1.5.0indirect
crates.ioicu_provider2.1.1indirect
crates.ioicu_provider_macros1.5.0indirect
crates.ioidna1.0.3indirect
crates.ioidna1.1.0indirect
crates.ioidna_adapter1.2.0indirect
crates.ioidna_adapter1.2.1indirect
crates.iojobserver0.1.32indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.169indirect
crates.iolibfuzzer-sys0.4.9indirect
crates.iolitemap0.7.4indirect
crates.iolitemap0.8.1indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.20.3indirect
crates.iopercent-encoding2.3.1indirect
crates.iopercent-encoding2.3.2indirect
crates.iopotential_utf0.1.4indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.106indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.93indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.38indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.44indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.218indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.228indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.218indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.228indirect
crates.ioshlex1.3.0indirect
crates.iosmallvec1.14.0indirect
crates.iosmallvec1.15.1indirect
crates.iostable_deref_trait1.2.0indirect
crates.iostable_deref_trait1.2.1indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.116indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.98indirect
crates.iosynstructure0.13.1indirect
crates.iosynstructure0.13.2indirect
crates.iotinystr0.7.6indirect
crates.iotinystr0.8.2indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.17indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.23indirect
crates.ioutf16_iter1.0.5indirect
crates.ioutf8_iter1.0.4indirect
crates.iowrite161.0.0indirect
crates.iowriteable0.5.5indirect
crates.iowriteable0.6.2indirect
crates.ioxml-rs0.8.25indirect
crates.ioyoke0.7.5indirect
crates.ioyoke0.8.1indirect
crates.ioyoke-derive0.7.5indirect
crates.ioyoke-derive0.8.1indirect
crates.iozerofrom0.1.5indirect
crates.iozerofrom0.1.6indirect
crates.iozerofrom-derive0.1.5indirect
crates.iozerofrom-derive0.1.6indirect
crates.iozerotrie0.2.3indirect
crates.iozerovec0.10.4indirect
crates.iozerovec0.11.5indirect
crates.iozerovec-derive0.10.3indirect
crates.iozerovec-derive0.11.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing crates:svg-hush@0.9.7 pulls in 17 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.