Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-04 21:43 UTC

corydolphin / flask-cors

Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask

PythonMIT★ 932 stars⑂ 155 forkssince Jul 2013View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

corydolphin/flask-cors holds a health index of 83 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (86/100) and lowest on Vitality (59/100). It was last updated 56 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

83
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

83
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 70 is calibrated to 83 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Cory DolphinPersonal account
81 followers147 public repossince Oct 2010Nextdoor

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
PyPIflask-cors6.0.556,994,6095857 days agopython

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

59Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 56 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence2/52 weeks with commits
7.6/18Commit volume6 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained5 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year6
human_commit_share0.99
days_since_last_push56
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases40 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 57 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~71.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count40
latest_release_tag6.0.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release57
mean_days_between_releases71.9
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?

78Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
48.2/60Stars932 stars
18.2/25Forks155 forks
4.3/15Watchers7 watchers
Inputs used
forks155
stars932
watchers7
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code 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_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads56,994,609 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesflask-cors
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads56,994,609
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?

68Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 64% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth43 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled43
top_contributor_share0.635
How it's scored
37.2/42Issue resolution89% of issues closed
26/30PR acceptance188/217 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 14/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs188
open_issues20
closed_issues156
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.886
closed_unmerged_prs29
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
13.8/25Owner reach81 followers of corydolphin
25/25Track record147 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers81
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logincorydolphin
public_repos147
account_age_days5,767
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 pypi
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 57 days ago
20/20Version history58 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesflask-cors
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish57

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter configtox.ini
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
2/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests5 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://flask-cors.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, flask-extensions, flask-cors, cors
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://flask-cors.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
docs_sitehttps://flask-cors.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

63Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0.2/2.5CI-Tests5 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3/7.5Code-ReviewFound 14/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
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
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained5 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
2.5/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities30 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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_packages7
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 pypi:flask-cors@6.0.5 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 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.

64Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history85 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.859
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format configtox.ini
11/11Static type checkingflask_cors/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsflask_cors/py.typed
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0.01
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable codePython with type-check config (flask_cors/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/30 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes22,655
source_files_sampled30
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

932GitHub stars
43contributors
6commits, last 12 months
56days since last push
40releases
1bus factor
20open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 155 ⇿
0Stars
155Forks
40Releases

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.

0408012016015532013-122020-032026-07
Major 5Minor 4Patch 27

Each point covers 12 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.4 / 10
5.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 21:43 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
1CI-Tests5 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 14/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained5 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
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
0Vulnerabilities30 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIflask>=0.9pyproject.toml
PyPIWerkzeug>=0.7pyproject.toml
PyPItyping_extensions>=4.6.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 69

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 66 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIflask3.1.0direct
PyPItyping-extensions4.12.2direct
PyPIwerkzeug3.1.3direct
PyPIbabel2.17.0indirect
PyPIblinker1.9.0indirect
PyPIcachetools5.5.2indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.1.31indirect
PyPIcfgv3.4.0indirect
PyPIchardet5.2.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.1indirect
PyPIclick8.1.8indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcoverage7.6.12indirect
PyPIdeptry0.23.0indirect
PyPIdistlib0.3.9indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.2.2indirect
PyPIfilelock3.17.0indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIgriffe1.5.7indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.8indirect
PyPIidna3.10indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata8.6.1indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.0.0indirect
PyPIitsdangerous2.2.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.5indirect
PyPImarkdown3.7indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.3.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.0indirect
PyPImkdocs-material9.6.5indirect
PyPImkdocs-material-extensions1.3.1indirect
PyPImkdocstringsindirect
PyPImkdocstrings0.28.1indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python1.16.1indirect
PyPImypy1.15.0indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.0.0indirect
PyPInodeenv1.9.1indirect
PyPIpackaging24.2indirect
PyPIpaginate0.5.7indirect
PyPIpathspec0.12.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.3.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.5.0indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.1.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.1indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions10.14.3indirect
PyPIpyproject-api1.9.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.3.4indirect
PyPIpytest-cov6.0.0indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag0.1indirect
PyPIregex2024.11.6indirect
PyPIrequests2.32.3indirect
PyPIrequirements-parser0.11.0indirect
PyPIruff0.9.7indirect
PyPIsetuptoolsindirect
PyPIsetuptools-scmindirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPItomli2.2.1indirect
PyPItox4.24.1indirect
PyPItox-uv1.25.0indirect
PyPItypes-setuptools75.8.0.20250210indirect
PyPIurllib32.3.0indirect
PyPIuv0.6.2indirect
PyPIvirtualenv20.29.2indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIzipp3.21.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:flask-cors@6.0.5 pulls in 7 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 statisticsPyPI.