Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-28 05:35 UTC

haraka / Haraka

A fast, highly extensible, and event driven SMTP server

JavaScriptMIT★ 5,614 stars⑂ 712 forkssince Mar 2011View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolNetwork servicehow this is determined

haraka/Haraka holds a health index of 96 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (94/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (60/100). It was last updated 14 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

96
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.

96
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 83 is calibrated to 96 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

HarakaOrganization
65 followers74 public repossince Oct 2011

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmharaka3.3.34,2661223 days agoharakasmtpserveremail

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 14 days ago
16.6/36Commit cadence24/52 weeks with commits
17.1/18Commit volume79 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained23 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year79
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push14
active_weeks_last_year24

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases47 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 23 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~18.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count47
latest_release_tagv3.3.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release23
mean_days_between_releases18.3
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?

86Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars5,614 stars
23.8/25Forks712 forks
11.9/15Watchers140 watchers
Inputs used
forks712
stars5,614
watchers140
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
48.4/80Monthly downloads4,266 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesharaka
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads4,266
unverified_packages_excluded
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 41% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 35 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.407
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
26.3/30PR acceptance1,955/2,231 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 6/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs1,955
open_issues1
closed_issues1,254
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.999
closed_unmerged_prs276
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
13.1/25Owner reach65 followers of haraka
25/25Track record74 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers65
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginharaka
public_repos74
account_age_days5,438

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 23 days ago
20/20Version history12 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesharaka
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish23

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

94Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.eslintrc.yaml, eslint.config.mjs, package.json ("prettier")
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.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_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://haraka.github.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssmtp, mta, javascript, spf, dkim, nodejs, haraka
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://haraka.github.io
docs_sitehttps://haraka.github.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

80Excellent · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
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
1.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 6/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 35 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained23 commit(s) and 6 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
4/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
6/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate7.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages103
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:haraka@3.3.3 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 103 packages. 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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history97 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.97
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes7,446
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.eslintrc.yaml, eslint.config.mjs, package.json ("prettier")
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
54.4/55Manageable file sizes1/95 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes67,825
source_files_sampled95
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

5,614GitHub stars
98contributors
79commits, last 12 months
14days since last push
47releases
2bus factor
1open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 712 ⇿
0Stars
712Forks
47Releases

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.

0125250375500625750687192011-032018-112026-08
Major 1Minor 4Patch 41

Each point covers 15 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.5 / 10
7.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-28 05:34 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
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
2Code-ReviewFound 6/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 35 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained23 commit(s) and 6 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
8SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 8
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
8Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 17
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmexpress^4.0http/package.json
npm@haraka/email-address~3.1.6package.json
npmharaka-config~1.6.3package.json
npmharaka-constants~1.0.8package.json
npmharaka-dsn~1.2.1package.json
npmharaka-email-message~1.4.3package.json
npmharaka-net-utils~1.9.2package.json
npmharaka-notes~1.1.3package.json
npmharaka-plugin-redis~2.1.0package.json
npmharaka-results~2.4.0package.json
npmharaka-tld~1.3.6package.json
npmharaka-utils~2.2.1package.json
npmipaddr.js~2.5.0package.json
npmnode-gyp~13.0.1package.json
npmnopt~10.0.1package.json
npmredis~6.2.0package.json
npmsemver~7.8.5package.json
All dependencies 49

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 17 direct and 32 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@haraka/email-address~3.1.6direct
npmexpress^4.0direct
npmharaka-config~1.6.3direct
npmharaka-constants~1.0.8direct
npmharaka-dsn~1.2.1direct
npmharaka-email-message~1.4.3direct
npmharaka-net-utils~1.9.2direct
npmharaka-notes~1.1.3direct
npmharaka-plugin-redis~2.1.0direct
npmharaka-results~2.4.0direct
npmharaka-tld~1.3.6direct
npmharaka-utils~2.2.1direct
npmipaddr.js~2.5.0direct
npmnode-gyp~13.0.1direct
npmnopt~10.0.1direct
npmredis~6.2.0direct
npmsemver~7.8.5direct
npm@haraka/eslint-config^3.0.0indirect
npm@haraka/ocsp~1.2.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-access~1.4.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-aliases~1.1.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-asn~2.2.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-attachment~1.2.1indirect
npmharaka-plugin-bounce~2.2.1indirect
npmharaka-plugin-clamd~1.0.6indirect
npmharaka-plugin-dcc~1.1.1indirect
npmharaka-plugin-dkim~1.3.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-dns-list~1.3.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-early_talker~1.0.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-fcrdns~1.2.1indirect
npmharaka-plugin-geoip~1.1.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-greylist~1.2.1indirect
npmharaka-plugin-headers~1.2.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-helo.checks~1.1.3indirect
npmharaka-plugin-karma~2.5.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-known-senders~1.2.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-limit~1.3.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-mail_from.is_resolvable~1.3.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-messagesniffer~1.0.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-qmail-deliverable~1.4.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-relay~1.0.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-rspamd~1.6.1indirect
npmharaka-plugin-spamassassin~1.1.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-spf~1.3.0indirect
npmharaka-plugin-syslog~1.1.2indirect
npmharaka-plugin-uribl~2.0.0indirect
npmharaka-test-fixtures^1.7.2indirect
npmmock-require~3.0.3indirect
npmtoobusy-js^0.5.1indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:haraka@3.3.3 pulls in 103 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 statisticsnpm.