Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 01:24 UTC

contabo / terraform-provider-contabo

Terraform Provider for Contabo Cloud-Services

GoMIT★ 80 stars⑂ 14 forkssince Apr 2022View on GitHub ↗

contabo/terraform-provider-contabo holds a health index of 54 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (64/100) and lowest on Security (32/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

54
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.

54
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 53 is calibrated to 54 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Contabo GmbHOrganization
111 followers6 public repossince Aug 2021

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

64Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 3 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence3/52 weeks with commits
7/18Commit volume5 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year5
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases32 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 3 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~63.7 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count32
latest_release_tagv0.1.44
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases63.7

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

45Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
30.8/60Stars80 stars
9.3/25Forks14 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks14
stars80
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

59Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 35% of commits
6.8/13.5Contributor breadth5 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled5
top_contributor_share0.353
How it's scored
31.8/42Issue resolution76% of issues closed
12.9/30PR acceptance3/7 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs3
open_issues11
closed_issues34
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.756
closed_unmerged_prs4
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
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
14.7/25Owner reach111 followers of contabo
15.9/25Track record6 public repos, account ~4 yr old
Inputs used
followers111
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logincontabo
public_repos6
account_age_days1,787
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

59Moderate · 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
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsterraform, terraform-provider, cloud, cloud-computing, cloud-services, cloud-storage, contabo, contabo-cloud
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

32At Risk · 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
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
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
6/7.5Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities49 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate3.2

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 instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/39 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes20,878
source_files_sampled39
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
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

80GitHub stars
5contributors
5commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
32releases
2bus factor
11open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch go package 'contabo.com/terraform-provider-contabo' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.2 / 10
3.2aggregate

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 · 2026-07-20 01:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
1Maintained2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
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
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities49 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/golang-jwt/jwtv3.2.2+incompatiblego.mod
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.3.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-plugin-sdk/v2v2.12.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/hprose/hprose-gov0.0.0-20161031134501-83de97da5004go.mod
Gogithub.com/minio/minio-go/v7v7.0.42go.mod
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/go-homedirv1.1.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/satori/go.uuidv1.2.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/sirupsen/logrusv1.9.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/oauth2v0.0.0-20210218202405-ba52d332ba99go.mod
Gocontabo.com/openapiv0.0.0go.mod
All dependencies 68

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 59 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/golang-jwt/jwtv3.2.2+incompatibledirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.3.0direct
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-plugin-sdk/v2v2.12.0direct
Gogithub.com/hprose/hprose-gov0.0.0-20161031134501-83de97da5004direct
Gogithub.com/minio/minio-go/v7v7.0.42direct
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/go-homedirv1.1.0direct
Gogithub.com/satori/go.uuidv1.2.0direct
Gogithub.com/sirupsen/logrusv1.9.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/oauth2v0.0.0-20210218202405-ba52d332ba99direct
Gogithub.com/agext/levenshteinv1.2.2indirect
Gogithub.com/apparentlymart/go-textseg/v13v13.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/davecgh/go-spewv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/dustin/go-humanizev1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/fatih/colorv1.13.0indirect
Gogithub.com/golang/protobufv1.5.2indirect
Gogithub.com/google/go-cmpv0.5.8indirect
Gogithub.com/gorilla/websocketv1.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/errwrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-checkpointv0.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-cleanhttpv0.5.2indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-ctyv1.4.1-0.20200414143053-d3edf31b6320indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-hclogv1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-multierrorv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-pluginv1.4.3indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-uuidv1.0.3indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-versionv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/hc-installv0.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/hcl/v2v2.11.1indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/logutilsv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-execv0.17.2indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-jsonv0.14.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-plugin-gov0.8.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-plugin-logv0.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-registry-addressv0.0.0-20210412075316-9b2996cce896indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/terraform-svchostv0.0.0-20200729002733-f050f53b9734indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/yamuxv0.0.0-20181012175058-2f1d1f20f75dindirect
Gogithub.com/imdario/mergov0.3.13indirect
Gogithub.com/json-iterator/gov1.1.12indirect
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compressv1.15.9indirect
Gogithub.com/klauspost/cpuid/v2v2.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/kr/prettyv0.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-colorablev0.1.12indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isattyv0.0.14indirect
Gogithub.com/minio/md5-simdv1.1.2indirect
Gogithub.com/minio/sha256-simdv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/copystructurev1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/go-testing-interfacev1.14.1indirect
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/go-wordwrapv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/mapstructurev1.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mitchellh/reflectwalkv1.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/concurrentv0.0.0-20180306012644-bacd9c7ef1ddindirect
Gogithub.com/modern-go/reflect2v1.0.2indirect
Gogithub.com/oklog/runv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/rs/xidv1.4.0indirect
Gogithub.com/vmihailenco/msgpackv4.0.4+incompatibleindirect
Gogithub.com/vmihailenco/msgpack/v4v4.3.12indirect
Gogithub.com/vmihailenco/tagparserv0.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/zclconf/go-ctyv1.10.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.0.0-20220722155217-630584e8d5aaindirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.0.0-20220722155237-a158d28d115bindirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.0.0-20220722155257-8c9f86f7a55findirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.3.7indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/appenginev1.6.6indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genprotov0.0.0-20200825200019-8632dd797987indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.45.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.27.1indirect
Gogopkg.in/ini.v1v1.66.6indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.0indirect
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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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