Public record
Software health reportschema 0.15.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 09:53 UTC

firedancer-io / firedancer

Firedancer is Jump Crypto's Solana validator software.

CCustom license★ 1,505 stars⑂ 498 forkssince Aug 2022View on GitHub ↗

firedancer-io/firedancer holds a health index of 97 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (100/100) and lowest on Security (63/100). It was last updated today. 5 contributors account for most of its recent work.

97
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

97
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 85 is calibrated to 97 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

firedancer-ioOrganization
274 followers47 public repossince Aug 2022

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

100Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
36/36Commit cadence52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume3,764 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year3,764
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases86 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 3 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~4.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count86
latest_release_tagv1.1.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3
mean_days_between_releases4.6
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?

74Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
51.5/60Stars1,505 stars
22.5/25Forks498 forks
8/15Watchers28 watchers
Inputs used
forks498
stars1,505
watchers28
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5Licenselicense file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
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?

86Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
45.9/54Bus factor5 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
17/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 25% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor5
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.246
How it's scored
36.2/42Issue resolution86% of issues closed
25.9/30PR acceptance7,711/8,946 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs7,711
open_issues198
closed_issues1,251
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.863
closed_unmerged_prs1,235
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
17.5/25Owner reach274 followers of firedancer-io
20.1/25Track record47 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers274
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginfiredancer-io
public_repos47
account_age_days1,439
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows18 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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://docs.firedancer.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics2 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssolana, c
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://docs.firedancer.io
docs_sitehttps://docs.firedancer.io
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
0/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
5.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
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
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.2/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
3.5/5SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities24 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

79Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/copilot-instructions.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,187
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapGNUmakefile, contrib/ed25519/dalek_target/Makefile, src/disco/bundle/proto/Makefile, src/disco/metrics/Makefile, src/disco/trace/Makefile, src/flamenco/features/Makefile, src/flamenco/runtime/tests/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_point_add/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_point_dbl/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_sigverify_0/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_sigverify_1/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/mul_wide/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/schl_cpu/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/sha512_modq_meta/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/sha512_pre/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/top_f1/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/top_f1_models/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesGNUmakefile, contrib/ed25519/dalek_target/Makefile, src/disco/bundle/proto/Makefile, src/disco/metrics/Makefile, src/disco/trace/Makefile, src/flamenco/features/Makefile, src/flamenco/runtime/tests/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_point_add/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_point_dbl/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_sigverify_0/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/ed25519_sigverify_1/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/mul_wide/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/schl_cpu/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/sha512_modq_meta/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/sha512_pre/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/top_f1/Makefile, src/wiredancer/sim/top_f1_models/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC (statically typed)
52.9/55Manageable file sizes71/1,903 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC
largest_source_bytes2,674,506
source_files_sampled1,903
oversized_source_files71
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/auth.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/block_engine.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/bundle.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/packet.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/relayer.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/shared.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/auth.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/block_engine.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/bundle.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/packet.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/shared.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/timestamp.proto, src/disco/events/schema/event.proto, src/disco/events/schema/events.proto
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filescontrib/bundle-test-server/protos/auth.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/block_engine.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/bundle.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/packet.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/relayer.proto, contrib/bundle-test-server/protos/shared.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/auth.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/block_engine.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/bundle.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/packet.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/shared.proto, src/disco/bundle/proto/timestamp.proto, src/disco/events/schema/event.proto, src/disco/events/schema/events.proto
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

1,505GitHub stars
100contributors
3,764commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
86releases
5bus factor
198open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.3 / 10
6.3aggregate

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 · 2026-07-20 09:52 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
7Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 16 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
7SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities24 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 70

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 70 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iobase64indirect
crates.iobindgenindirect
crates.iobs58indirect
crates.iochronoindirect
crates.iocrossbeam-channelindirect
crates.iodirs-nextindirect
crates.ioed25519-dalekindirect
crates.ioed25519-dalek1.0.1indirect
crates.ioenv_loggerindirect
crates.iofuturesindirect
crates.iofutures-utilindirect
crates.iohexindirect
crates.iolazy_staticindirect
crates.iolibcindirect
crates.iologindirect
crates.ioprostindirect
crates.ioprost-typesindirect
crates.ioprotobuf-srcindirect
crates.ioquicheindirect
crates.ioquinnindirect
crates.iorandindirect
crates.iorustlsindirect
crates.iorustls-post-quantumindirect
crates.iorustylineindirect
crates.iosolana-address-lookup-table-interfaceindirect
crates.iosolana-bls-signaturesindirect
crates.iosolana-bpf-loader-programindirect
crates.iosolana-cliindirect
crates.iosolana-clientindirect
crates.iosolana-clockindirect
crates.iosolana-commitment-configindirect
crates.iosolana-compute-budgetindirect
crates.iosolana-connection-cacheindirect
crates.iosolana-feature-setindirect
crates.iosolana-keypairindirect
crates.iosolana-messageindirect
crates.iosolana-program-runtimeindirect
crates.iosolana-pubkeyindirect
crates.iosolana-quic-clientindirect
crates.iosolana-rpc-client-apiindirect
crates.iosolana-rpc-client-nonce-utilsindirect
crates.iosolana-sdkindirect
crates.iosolana-sdk-idsindirect
crates.iosolana-streamerindirect
crates.iosolana-system-interfaceindirect
crates.iosolana-transactionindirect
crates.iosolana_rbpfindirect
crates.iothiserrorindirect
crates.iotokioindirect
crates.iotokio-streamindirect
crates.iotokio-utilindirect
crates.iotonicindirect
crates.iotonic-buildindirect
crates.iotonic-prostindirect
crates.iotonic-prost-buildindirect
crates.iotower-httpindirect
crates.iotracingindirect
crates.iotracing-subscriberindirect
crates.iowincode0.5.3indirect
Gogithub.com/quic-go/quic-gov0.57.1indirect
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.45.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.47.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.38.0indirect
npmvitepress^1.6.3indirect
PyPIclickindirect
PyPIcoloramaindirect
PyPIpsutilindirect
PyPIpyyamlindirect
PyPIrequestsindirect
PyPItabulateindirect
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 v0.15.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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