# fleetdm/fleet — health index 84/100 (Good)

> Inspection of the public repository fleetdm/fleet by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/fleetdm/fleet
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/fleetdm/fleet
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/fleetdm/fleet/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/f/fleetdm/fleet.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-21
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.18.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 96/100 | Excellent |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 81/100 | Good |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 88/100 | Excellent |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 96/100 | Excellent |
| Security | 16% | 51/100 | Moderate |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 91/100 | Excellent |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | Open device management |
| Homepage | https://fleetdm.com |
| Primary language | Go |
| Stars | 6,616 |
| Forks | 945 |
| Created | 2020-11-03 |
| Last push | 2026-07-21 |
| Latest release | fleet-v4.89.1 |
| Commits (last year) | 8,619 |
| Bus factor | 11 |
| Topics | osquery, gitops, device-management, vulnerability-management, binary-authorization, configuration-management, mdm, orchestration, security, software-management, telemetry, ios, patching, scripting, linux, open-source, macos, powershell |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | fleetctl | 4.89.1 | 82,796 |

## Vitality — 96/100 (Excellent)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | met | 36 / 36 | 52/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 8619 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | met | 10 / 10 | 30 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |

### Release discipline — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 100 releases published |
| Release recency | met | 36 / 36 | latest release 4 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~5.3 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 10 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | maintenance record not established from the collected data |

## Community & Adoption — 81/100 (Good)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 94/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | met | 60 / 60 | 6,616 stars |
| Forks | partial | 24.8 / 25 | 945 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 9.1 / 15 | 44 watchers |

### Community health — 66/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | partial | 16.9 / 22.5 | license file present, not a recognized license |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | met | 6.3 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 82/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 65.6 / 80 | 82,796 downloads/month across npm |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 88/100 (Excellent)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 98/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | met | 54 / 54 | 11 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 20.8 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 7% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 100 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | met | 10 / 10 | project has 22 contributing companies or organizations |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 88/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 39.2 / 46.8 | 84% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 33.4 / 38.2 | 26983/30931 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | met | 15 / 15 | all changesets reviewed |

### Ownership & stewardship — 66/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 17.8 / 25 | 297 followers of fleetdm |
| Track record | partial | 17.9 / 25 | 6 public repos, account ~5 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 1 package(s) on npm |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 4 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 235 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 96/100 (Excellent)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 106 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | .eslintrc, .eslintrc.js, .golangci.yml, .rubocop.yml, eslint.config.js |
| Pre-commit hooks | met | 9.6 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | met | 6.4 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://fleetdm.com |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 18 topics |
| Wiki | not met | 0 / 10 | — |

## Security — 51/100 (Moderate)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 57/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | partial | 6.8 / 7.5 | binaries present in source code |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 4.5 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| CII-Best-Practices | partial | 1.2 / 2.5 | badge detected: Passing |
| Code-Review | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | all changesets reviewed |
| Contributors | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | project has 22 contributing companies or organizations |
| Dangerous-Workflow | not met | 0 / 10 | dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | partial | 2.2 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 30 commit(s) and 26 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| Packaging | met | 5 / 5 | packaging workflow detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 4.5 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9 |
| SAST | partial | 3.5 / 5 | SAST tool detected but not run on all commits |
| Security-Policy | met | 5 / 5 | security policy file detected |
| Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | not met | 0 / 7.5 | 116 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 28/100 (Critical)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 1976 resolved dependencies against OSV; 1438 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.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 2.5 / 35 | 20 affected: lodash 4.17.11 (critical 9.1), axios 1.16.1 (high 8.2), github.com/docker/docker v28.0.0+incompatible (high 8.8), +17 more |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | excluded | 0 / 25 | transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope |
| No advisories left outstanding | partial | 18.8 / 40 | 6 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2594 days ago |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 91/100 (Excellent)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 75/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | .claude/CLAUDE.md, server/chart/CLAUDE.md, website/.claude/CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | excluded | 0 / 40 | no data |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 96/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | met | 18 / 18 | Makefile, cmd/fleet-mcp/Makefile, orbit/pkg/dataflatten/testdata/nested/Makefile, server/mdm/scep/Makefile, server/vulnerabilities/nvd/tools/Makefile, third_party/goval-dictionary/GNUmakefile, tools/github-manage/Makefile, tools/hangar/Taskfile.yml, tools/hangar/build/Taskfile.yml, tools/hangar/build/darwin/Taskfile.yml, tools/screencap/Makefile, tools/terraform/Makefile |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | .eslintrc, .eslintrc.js, .golangci.yml, .rubocop.yml, eslint.config.js |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | ee/fleetd-chrome/tsconfig.json, tools/hangar/frontend/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | excluded | 0 / 10 | no data |
| Automated maintenance | partial | 5 / 8 | dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 9 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9 |

### Code legibility for models — 99/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Go (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 53.9 / 55 | 156/7490 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | server/mdm/nanodep/docs/openapi.yaml, server/mdm/nanomdm/docs/openapi.yaml, tools/terraform/openapi.json |
| MCP server | met | 20 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | met | 40 / 40 | example, examples |

## Collection warnings

- Could not fetch go package 'github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4' from its registry
- Could not fetch go package 'github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4/tools/dibble' from its registry
- Could not fetch go package 'github.com/fleetdm/fleet/tools/hangar' from its registry
- Could not fetch go package 'github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4/tools/upgrade' from its registry
- Could not fetch go package 'github.com/fleetdm/fleet/v4/tools/snapshot' from its registry
- Could not fetch go package 'github.com/fleetdm/fleet/tools/screencap' from its registry
- Could not fetch npm package 'fleetd-for-chrome' from its registry
- Could not fetch npm package 'fleet-slackbot' from its registry
- Resolved dependency list truncated to 2000 of 3414 packages (counts remain complete)
- deps.dev does not index npm:fleetctl@4.89.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt