Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-05 08:10 UTC

deckhouse / yandex-csi-driver

A Container Storage Interface (CSI) Driver for Yandex.Cloud Compute Disks

GoApache-2.0★ 99 stars⑂ 12 forkssince Jan 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindNetwork serviceLibraryhow this is determined

deckhouse/yandex-csi-driver holds a health index of 26 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (71/100) and lowest on Security (31/100). It was last updated 15 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

26
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

26
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 51 is calibrated to 51 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

deckhouseOrganization
131 followers95 public repossince Sep 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/deckhouse/yandex-csi-driverv0.15.2-1115 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

56Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 15 days ago
2.1/36Commit cadence — 3/52 weeks with commits
6.3/18Commit volume — 4 commits in the last year
1/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
commits_last_year4
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push15
active_weeks_last_year3
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 8 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 15 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~254 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count8
latest_release_tagv0.15.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release15
mean_days_between_releases254
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?

49Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
32.3/60Stars — 99 stars
8.7/25Forks — 12 forks
8.3/15Watchers — 32 watchers
Inputs used
forks12
stars99
watchers32
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
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

Sustainability & Governance

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

71Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 35% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 18 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled18
top_contributor_share0.349
How it's scored
16.8/42Issue resolution — 40% of issues closed
23.8/30PR acceptance — 19/24 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 15/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs19
open_issues3
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.4
closed_unmerged_prs5
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
15.2/25Owner reach — 131 followers of deckhouse
25/25Track record — 95 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers131
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_logindeckhouse
public_repos95
account_age_days2,501

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 15 days ago
20/20Version history — 11 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/deckhouse/yandex-csi-driver
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish15

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

40Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
2/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsyandex-cloud, csi-driver, kubernetes
has_wikiyes
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

31At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.2/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 15/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0.8/7.5Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
2/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.5
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier50
security_posture_after_multiplier22
security_posture_before_jurisdiction45
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): branch_protection, signed_releases. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 50% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.
How it's scored
9.5/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: google.golang.org/grpc v1.79.3 (critical 9.1)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories3
affected_packages2
assessed_packages31
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 31 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

44Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
24.8/40Legible commit history — 20 of 43 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.465
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 43
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/11 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes22,218
source_files_sampled11
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

99GitHub stars
18contributors
4commits, last 12 months
15days since last push
8releases
2bus factor
3open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 12 ⇿
0Stars
12Forks
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.

0246810121122020-052022-032024-02
Major 0Minor 1Patch 1

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate

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 08:10 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-Tests3 out of 16 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 1
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 15/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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
4Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
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
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 14
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/container-storage-interface/specv1.11.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/golang/protobufv1.5.4go.mod
Gogithub.com/sirupsen/logrusv1.9.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/yandex-cloud/go-genprotov0.0.0-20250127124313-5be1a2cc06d4go.mod
Gogithub.com/yandex-cloud/go-sdkv0.0.0-20250127132311-016f84adc072go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genprotov0.0.0-20250124145028-65684f501c47go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.79.3go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10go.mod
Gok8s.io/apimachineryv0.32.1go.mod
Gok8s.io/klogv1.0.0go.mod
Gok8s.io/mount-utilsv0.32.1go.mod
Gok8s.io/utilsv0.0.0-20241210054802-24370beab758go.mod
All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 14 direct and 17 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/container-storage-interface/specv1.11.0direct
Gogithub.com/golang/protobufv1.5.4direct
Gogithub.com/sirupsen/logrusv1.9.3direct
Gogithub.com/yandex-cloud/go-genprotov0.0.0-20250127124313-5be1a2cc06d4direct
Gogithub.com/yandex-cloud/go-sdkv0.0.0-20250127132311-016f84adc072direct
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/genprotov0.0.0-20250124145028-65684f501c47direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.79.3direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.10direct
Gok8s.io/apimachineryv0.32.1direct
Gok8s.io/klogv1.0.0direct
Gok8s.io/mount-utilsv0.32.1direct
Gok8s.io/utilsv0.0.0-20241210054802-24370beab758direct
Gogithub.com/ghodss/yamlv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/logrv1.4.3indirect
Gogithub.com/golang-jwt/jwt/v4v4.5.2indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/errwrapv1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/hashicorp/go-multierrorv1.1.1indirect
Gogithub.com/moby/sys/mountinfov0.7.2indirect
Gogithub.com/moby/sys/usernsv0.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/rogpeppe/go-internalv1.14.1indirect
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.43.0indirect
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/sdk/metricv1.43.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.57.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.40.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/apiv0.0.0-20251202230838-ff82c1b0f217indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto/googleapis/rpcv0.0.0-20251202230838-ff82c1b0f217indirect
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v2v2.4.0indirect
Gok8s.io/klog/v2v2.130.1indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 31 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
google.golang.org/grpcv1.79.3directcritical21.82.1
go.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.43.0indirectunknown11.44.0

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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