Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-05 03:32 UTC

danielgatis / rembg

Rembg is a tool to remove images background

PythonMIT★ 24,136 stars⑂ 2,377 forkssince Aug 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

danielgatis/rembg holds a health index of 81 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (82/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (34/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

81
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.

81
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 69 is calibrated to 81 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Daniel GatisPersonal account
705 followers49 public repossince Apr 2008

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
PyPIrembg2.0.773,684,0154917 days agoremovebackgroundu2net

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

82Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence20/52 weeks with commits
15.8/18Commit volume57 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained9 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year57
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases64 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 17 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~27 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count64
latest_release_tagv2.0.77
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release17
mean_days_between_releases27

Community & Adoption

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

81Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars24,136 stars
25/25Forks2,377 forks
12.4/15Watchers168 watchers
Inputs used
forks2,377
stars24,136
watchers168
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_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads3,684,015 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrembg
dependents
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads
monthly_downloads3,684,015
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
6.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 71% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth79 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled79
top_contributor_share0.712
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
21.7/30PR acceptance112/155 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs112
open_issues0
closed_issues593
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d4
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs43
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
20.5/25Owner reach705 followers of danielgatis
24.4/25Track record49 public repos, account ~18 yr old
Inputs used
followers705
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logindanielgatis
public_repos49
account_age_days6,685
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 17 days ago
20/20Version history49 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrembg
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish17

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

58Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests3 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsimage-processing, background-removal, python
has_wikino
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?

61Moderate · 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
1.2/2.5CI-Tests3 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 16 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
7.5/7.5Maintained9 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
1.5/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 3
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate5.1

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_packages25
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:rembg@2.0.77 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 25 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.

34At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
23.5/40Legible commit history44 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.44
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
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
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/33 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes15,825
source_files_sampled33
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examplesexamples, notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

24,136GitHub stars
79contributors
57commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
64releases
1bus factor
0open 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 ★ / 2,377 ⇿
0Stars
2,377Forks
25Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

1,2001,4001,6001,8002,0002,2002,4002,377102023-112025-042026-08
Major 0Minor 0Patch 25

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10
5.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-05 03:31 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
5CI-Tests3 out of 6 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 4/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained9 commit(s) and 5 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 3
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 28
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIjsonschema^4.25.1pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy^2.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpillow^12.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpooch^1.8.2pyproject.toml
PyPIpymatting^1.1.14pyproject.toml
PyPIscikit-image^0.26.0pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy^1.16.3pyproject.toml
PyPItqdm^4.67.1pyproject.toml
PyPIonnxruntime^1.23.2pyproject.toml
PyPIonnxruntime-gpu^1.23.2pyproject.toml
PyPIonnxruntime-rocm^1.22.0pyproject.toml
PyPIaiohttp^3.13.2pyproject.toml
PyPIasyncer^0.0.12pyproject.toml
PyPIclick^8.3.1pyproject.toml
PyPIfastapi^0.128.0pyproject.toml
PyPIfiletype^1.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIgradio^6.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-multipart^0.0.21pyproject.toml
PyPIsniffio^1.3.1pyproject.toml
PyPIuvicorn^0.40.0pyproject.toml
PyPIwatchdog^6.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIbandit^1.9.2pyproject.toml
PyPIblack^25.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPIflake8^7.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIimagehash^4.3.2pyproject.toml
PyPIisort^7.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPImypy^1.19.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpytest^9.0.2pyproject.toml
All dependencies 28

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 28 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohttpdirect
PyPIasyncerdirect
PyPIbanditdirect
PyPIblackdirect
PyPIclickdirect
PyPIfastapidirect
PyPIfiletypedirect
PyPIflake8direct
PyPIgradiodirect
PyPIimagehashdirect
PyPIisortdirect
PyPIjsonschemadirect
PyPImypydirect
PyPInumpydirect
PyPIonnxruntimedirect
PyPIonnxruntime-gpudirect
PyPIonnxruntime-rocmdirect
PyPIpillowdirect
PyPIpoochdirect
PyPIpymattingdirect
PyPIpytestdirect
PyPIpython-multipartdirect
PyPIscikit-imagedirect
PyPIscipydirect
PyPIsniffiodirect
PyPItqdmdirect
PyPIuvicorndirect
PyPIwatchdogdirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:rembg@2.0.77 pulls in 25 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.