Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-23 02:07 UTC

emilianobonassi / jpbc

jPBC fork for get Maven works again

JavaCustom license★ 18 stars⑂ 14 forkssince Sep 2015View on GitHub ↗
KindMobile applicationhow this is determined

emilianobonassi/jpbc holds a health index of 23 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (48/100) and lowest on Vitality (13/100). It was last updated 2796 days ago.

23
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.

23
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 33 is calibrated to 27 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Emiliano BonassiPersonal account
378 followers81 public repossince Jul 2014

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

13Critical · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 2,796 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push2,796
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 1 version tags (no GitHub releases)
0/36Release recency — latest release 4,040 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tagv2.0.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release4,040
mean_days_between_releases—
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?

37Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
20/60Stars — 18 stars
9.3/25Forks — 14 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks14
stars18
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license 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_licenseno
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?

42Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
10.5/42Issue resolution — 25% of issues closed
0/30PR acceptance — no decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues3
closed_issues1
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.25
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): PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
18.5/25Owner reach — 378 followers of emilianobonassi
25/25Track record — 81 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers378
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginemilianobonassi
public_repos81
account_age_days4,495
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

44Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — http://gas.dia.unisa.it/projects/jpbc/index.html
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://gas.dia.unisa.it/projects/jpbc/index.html
docs_sitehttp://gas.dia.unisa.it/projects/jpbc/index.html
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

23At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated12
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive6
scorecard_aggregate1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
19.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: org.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk16 1.46 (moderate 5.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
35.2/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2,009 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages2
assessed_packages14
unassessed_packages1
affected_by_severitymoderate 2
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 14 resolved dependencies against OSV. 1 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.

48Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no 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
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — jpbc-android/pom.xml, jpbc-api/pom.xml, jpbc-benchmark/pom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Java (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8Automated maintenance — no data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifestsjpbc-android/pom.xml, jpbc-api/pom.xml, jpbc-benchmark/pom.xml, jpbc-crypto/pom.xml, jpbc-mm/pom.xml, jpbc-pbc/pom.xml, jpbc-plaf/pom.xml, jpbc-site-skin/pom.xml, jpbc-test/pom.xml, pom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
54.8/55Manageable file sizes — 1/363 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes86,857
source_files_sampled363
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

18GitHub stars
-contributors
0commits, last 12 months
2,796days since last push
1releases
-bus factor
3open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Contributor list unavailable
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-mm' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-pbc' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-test' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-crypto' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-android' from its registry
  • Could not fetch maven package 'it.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-benchmark' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 14 ⇿
0Stars
14Forks

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.

0246810121212016-092019-082022-06

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 1.0 / 10
1.0aggregate

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 · 2026-10-23 02:07 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 19
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0jpbc-android/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf2.0.0jpbc-android/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0jpbc-benchmark/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf2.0.0jpbc-benchmark/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-pbc2.0.0jpbc-benchmark/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0jpbc-crypto/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf2.0.0jpbc-crypto/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-pbc2.0.0jpbc-crypto/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-mm2.0.0jpbc-crypto/pom.xml
Mavenorg.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk161.46jpbc-crypto/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0jpbc-mm/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf2.0.0jpbc-mm/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0jpbc-pbc/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf2.0.0jpbc-pbc/pom.xml
Mavennet.java.dev.jna:jna3.2.5jpbc-pbc/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0jpbc-plaf/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0jpbc-test/pom.xml
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf2.0.0jpbc-test/pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.maven.doxia:doxia-core1.1.3pom.xml
All dependencies 15

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-api2.0.0direct
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-mm2.0.0direct
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-pbc2.0.0direct
Mavenit.unisa.dia.gas:jpbc-plaf2.0.0direct
Mavennet.java.dev.jna:jna3.2.5direct
Mavenorg.apache.maven.doxia:doxia-core1.1.3direct
Mavenorg.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk161.46direct
Mavencom.google.android:android4.1.1.4indirect
Mavencom.jayway.maven.plugins.android.generation2:android-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavenjunit:junit4.8.2indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-changes-plugin2.3indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin2.3indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin2.2indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-project-info-reports-plugin2.1.2indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-site-plugin2.1.1indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 14 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 1 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
org.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk161.46directmoderate31.73
junit:junit4.8.2indirectmoderate14.13.1

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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