Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 04:25 UTC

enesgulerdev / sentinel

Sub-millisecond AI fraud detection at enterprise scale. Engineered for high-throughput predictability.

Python · HCL · GoMIT★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Mar 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindNetwork servicehow this is determined
#go#kafka#kubernetes#postgresql#redis#redpanda#rust#helm#argocd#grafana#prometheus#event-driven#fraud-detection#python#opa

enesgulerdev/sentinel holds a health index of 57 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (89/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated 17 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

57
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.

57
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 55 is calibrated to 57 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Enes GulerPersonal account
3 followers3 public repossince Mar 2025

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
PyPIsentinelpoints to another repo — not scored1.0.0-81513 days ago—
crates.iovalidatorpoints to another repo — not scored0.21.03,830,5732748 days agoapivalidationvalidator

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

73Good
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 17 days ago
15.9/36Commit cadence — 23/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 532 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year532
human_commit_share0.69
days_since_last_push17
active_weeks_last_year23

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 17 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~2.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv1.26.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release17
mean_days_between_releases2.9
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?

24At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

35Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

15Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 98% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.978

Issue & PR responsiveness

67Good
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 1/1 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
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): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

27At Risk
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
4.3/25Owner reach — 3 followers of enesgulerdev
7.3/25Track record — 3 public repos, account ~1 yr old
Inputs used
followers3
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginenesgulerdev
public_repos3
account_age_days540
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

89Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

92Excellent
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 15 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsgo, kafka, kubernetes, postgresql, redis, redpanda, rust, helm, argocd, grafana, prometheus, event-driven, fraud-detection, python, opa
has_wikiyes
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?

39Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

39Weak
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — no SAST tool detected
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
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

53Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 69 of 69 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

61Moderate
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Taskfile.yaml
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock, go.sum, uv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesTaskfile.yaml
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestssrc/api/go.mod, src/validator/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/18 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes8,319
source_files_sampled18
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

0GitHub stars
2contributors
532commits, last 12 months
17days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • pypi package 'sentinel' points at a different repository (https://github.com/eddieantonio/sentinel.git); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • crates package 'validator' points at a different repository (https://github.com/Keats/validator); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.9 / 10
3.9aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 04:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
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 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
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
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 61
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIalembic>=1.18.4pyproject.toml
PyPIconfluent-kafka>=2.14.0pyproject.toml
PyPIfastapi>=0.136.1pyproject.toml
PyPIlightgbm>=4.6.0pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy>=2.4.4pyproject.toml
PyPIonnx>=1.22.0pyproject.toml
PyPIonnxmltools>=1.16.0pyproject.toml
PyPIonnxruntime>=1.25.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpandas>=3.0.2pyproject.toml
PyPIprefect>=3.6.28pyproject.toml
PyPIredis>=7.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.33.1pyproject.toml
PyPIscikit-learn>=1.8.0pyproject.toml
PyPIsqlalchemy>=2.0.49pyproject.toml
PyPIstreamlit>=1.57.0pyproject.toml
PyPIuvicorn>=0.46.0pyproject.toml
PyPIxgboost>=3.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIgdown>=6.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIorjson>=3.11.6pyproject.toml
PyPIgitpython>=3.1.57pyproject.toml
PyPImako>=1.3.12pyproject.toml
PyPIpsycopg2-binary>=2.9.12pyproject.toml
PyPIpyinstrument>=5.1.2pyproject.toml
PyPIaiokafka>=0.14.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpsycopg>=3.3.4pyproject.toml
PyPIstarlette>=1.3.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpsycopg-binary>=3.3.4pyproject.toml
PyPIopentelemetry-api>=1.41.1pyproject.toml
PyPIopentelemetry-sdk>=1.41.1pyproject.toml
PyPIopentelemetry-exporter-otlp>=1.41.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpytest-asyncio>=1.4.0pyproject.toml
PyPIuvloop>=0.22.1pyproject.toml
PyPIcryptography>=50.0.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-multipart>=0.0.30pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic-settings>=2.14.2pyproject.toml
PyPIsoupsieve>=2.8.4pyproject.toml
PyPIpillow>=12.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIgoogle-genai>=2.12.1pyproject.toml
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2v1.43.0src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/configv1.32.31src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/credentialsv1.19.30src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/aws/aws-sdk-go-v2/service/s3v1.106.0src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/gin-contrib/pprofv1.5.4src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/gin-gonic/ginv1.12.0src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-redis/redismock/v9v9.2.0src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/goccy/go-jsonv0.10.6src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_golangv1.23.2src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/redis/go-redis/v9v9.19.0src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/segmentio/kafka-gov0.4.51src/api/go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1src/api/go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/zapv1.28.0src/api/go.mod
crates.iorskafka0.5src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.ioreqwest0.12src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.39src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1.0src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror1.0src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.iolog0.4src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing0.1src/validator/Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing-subscriber0.3src/validator/Cargo.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with enesgulerdev/sentinel. Read them side by side →

98netdata/netdataThe fastest path to AI-powered full stack observability, even for lean teams.Exceptional100risingwavelabs/risingwaveEvent streaming platform for agentic AI. Continuously ingest, transform, and serve event streams in real time, at scale.Exceptional99taskforcesh/bullmqBullMQ - Message Queue and Batch processing for NodeJS, Python, .NET, Elixir, Rust and PHP based on Redis or PostgreSQLExceptional99ag2ai/faststreamFastStream is an asynchronous Python framework for building event-driven applications. It brings together message broker integration, dependency injection, validation, testing utilities, and AsyncAPI documentation generation in a single toolkitExceptional98pulumi/pulumiPulumi - Infrastructure as Code in any programming language 🚀Exceptional99IBM/mcp-context-forgeAn AI Gateway, registry, and proxy that sits in front of any MCP, A2A, or REST/gRPC APIs, exposing a unified endpoint with centralized discovery, guardrails and management. Optimizes Agent & Tool calling, and supports plugins.Exceptional

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 — PyPI, crates.io.