Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-13 22:14 UTC

code0-tech / code0-zero_track

Common helpers for Code0 rails applications

RubyCustom license★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Feb 2025View on GitHub ↗

code0-tech/code0-zero_track holds a health index of 59 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (70/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (30/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

59
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

59
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

CodeZeroOrganization
32 followers27 public repossince Nov 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
RubyGemscode0-zero_track0.0.9-100 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

70Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence8/52 weeks with commits
10.3/18Commit volume13 commits in the last year
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained4 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
commits_last_year13
human_commit_share0.944
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases9 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~67.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tag0.0.9
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases67.1
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
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
45.8/80Total downloads25,352 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescode0-zero_track
dependents
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads25,352
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance10/10 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs10
open_issues0
closed_issues4
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio1
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): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
10.9/25Owner reach32 followers of code0-tech
16/25Track record27 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers32
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logincode0-tech
public_repos27
account_age_days1,005
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 rubygems
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history10 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescode0-zero_track
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
12/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests6 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
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?

46Weak · 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
1.5/2.5CI-Tests6 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
3/7.5Maintained4 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
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
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities74 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories119
affected_packages17
assessed_packages97
unassessed_packages9
affected_by_severitycritical 2, high 10, moderate 3, low 2
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 97 resolved dependencies against OSV. 9 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.

36Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
15.7/40Legible commit history10 of 34 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.294
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 environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 36
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
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
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeRuby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/63 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes10,082
source_files_sampled63
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
13commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
9releases
1bus factor
0open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.3 / 10
3.3aggregate

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 · 2026-08-13 22:14 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
6CI-Tests6 out of 10 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 6
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 6 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
4Maintained4 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 4
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities74 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 106

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 106 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsactioncable8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactionmailbox8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactionmailer8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactionpack8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactiontext8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactionview8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactivejob8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactivestorage8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.2indirect
RubyGemsbase640.2.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.4.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal3.1.9indirect
RubyGemsbinding_of_caller1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsbuilder3.3.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.5indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool2.5.0indirect
RubyGemscrass1.0.6indirect
RubyGemsdate3.4.1indirect
RubyGemsdebug_inspector1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.6.0indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.1indirect
RubyGemserubi1.13.1indirect
RubyGemsglobalid1.2.1indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.14.7indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.0indirect
RubyGemsirb1.15.1indirect
RubyGemsjson2.10.1indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.4indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.6.6indirect
RubyGemsloofah2.24.0indirect
RubyGemsmail2.8.1indirect
RubyGemsmarcel1.0.4indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsminitest5.25.4indirect
RubyGemsnet-imap0.5.6indirect
RubyGemsnet-pop0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-protocol0.2.2indirect
RubyGemsnet-smtp0.5.1indirect
RubyGemsnio4r2.7.4indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.18.2indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.18.2-aarch64-linux-muslindirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.18.2-arm-linux-muslindirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.18.2-x86_64-linux-muslindirect
RubyGemsparallel1.26.3indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.7.1indirect
RubyGemspp0.6.2indirect
RubyGemsprettyprint0.2.0indirect
RubyGemsproc_to_ast0.2.0indirect
RubyGemspsych5.2.3indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.1.10indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrackup2.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrails8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsrails-dom-testing2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrails-html-sanitizer1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsrailties8.0.1indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrakeindirect
RubyGemsrake13.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrdoc6.12.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.10.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.0indirect
RubyGemsrouge4.5.1indirect
RubyGemsrspecindirect
RubyGemsrspec3.13.0indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.3indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.2indirect
RubyGemsrspec-parameterizedindirect
RubyGemsrspec-parameterized1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsrspec-parameterized-core1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsrspec-parameterized-table_syntax1.0.1indirect
RubyGemsrspec-railsindirect
RubyGemsrspec-rails7.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.2indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.72.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.38.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-railsindirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rails2.30.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rakeindirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rake0.7.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspecindirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec3.4.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec_railsindirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec_rails2.30.0indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.1.3indirect
RubyGemsthor1.3.2indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.4.3indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.1.4indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.0.4indirect
RubyGemsunparser0.6.15indirect
RubyGemsuri1.0.2indirect
RubyGemsuseragent0.16.11indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-driver0.7.7indirect
RubyGemswebsocket-extensions0.1.5indirect
RubyGemszeitwerkindirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.7.1indirect
Dependency advisories 17

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 97 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 17 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 9 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
activestorage8.0.1indirectcritical78.1.3.1
rack-session2.1.0indirectcritical22.1.2
activesupport8.0.1indirecthigh38.1.2.1
concurrent-ruby1.3.5indirecthigh31.3.7
json2.10.1indirecthigh22.19.9
nokogiri1.18.2indirecthigh151.19.4
nokogiri1.18.2-aarch64-linux-muslindirecthigh151.19.4
nokogiri1.18.2-arm-linux-muslindirecthigh151.19.4
nokogiri1.18.2-x86_64-linux-muslindirecthigh151.19.4
rack3.1.10indirecthigh233.2.6
uri1.0.2indirecthigh21.0.4
websocket-driver0.7.7indirecthigh40.8.2
activerecord8.0.1indirectmoderate18.0.2.1
loofah2.24.0indirectmoderate12.25.2
net-imap0.5.6indirectmoderate90.6.4.1
actionview8.0.1indirectlow18.1.2.1
rails-html-sanitizer1.6.2indirectlow11.7.1

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsRubyGems.