Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-05 16:34 UTC

imagekit-developer / imagekit-php

PHP SDK for ImageKit.io API.

PHPMIT★ 46 stars⑂ 14 forkssince Jan 2020View on GitHub ↗

imagekit-developer/imagekit-php holds a health index of 31 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (71/100) and lowest on Vitality (32/100). It was last updated 44 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

31
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.

31
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 51 is calibrated to 51 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ImagekitOrganization
43 followers44 public repossince Oct 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
Packagistimagekit/imagekit4.0.252,39213730 days agolibraryimage-managementimagekit

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

32At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 44 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push44
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases14 releases published
7.2/36Release recencylatest release 730 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~148.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count14
latest_release_tag4.0.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release730
mean_days_between_releases148.9
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?

51Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
26.8/60Stars46 stars
9.3/25Forks14 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks14
stars46
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized 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_badges8
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicescodecov.io, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
62.9/80Monthly downloads52,392 downloads/month across packagist
6.7/20Registry dependents9 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesimagekit/imagekit
dependents9
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads1,031,056
monthly_downloads52,392
unverified_packages_excluded

Sustainability & Governance

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

71Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
11.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 48% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth6 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.475
How it's scored
39.4/42Issue resolution94% of issues closed
22.5/30PR acceptance27/36 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_prs27
open_issues2
closed_issues31
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.939
closed_unmerged_prs9
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
11.8/25Owner reach43 followers of imagekit-developer
24/25Track record44 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers43
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginimagekit-developer
public_repos44
account_age_days3,610
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on packagist
14/35Publish recencylatest publish 730 days ago
20/20Version history13 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesimagekit/imagekit
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish730

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://imagekit.io
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicshacktoberfest, image-manipulation, image-optimization
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://imagekit.io
docs_sitehttps://imagekit.io
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

40Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
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 10 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities18 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate3.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
14.8/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: guzzlehttp/guzzle 6.5.8 (high 7.2)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories18
affected_packages5
assessed_packages37
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 3
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 37 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

38Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
7.5/40Legible commit history14 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.14
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
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
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePHP without a type-check config
53.5/55Manageable file sizes1/37 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes61,518
source_files_sampled37
oversized_source_files1
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplessample
Inputs used
example_dirssample
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

46GitHub stars
6contributors
0commits, last 12 months
44days since last push
14releases
2bus factor
2open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 14 ⇿
0Stars
14Forks
10Releases

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.

03581013151412020-012022-012023-12
Major 2Minor 2Patch 6

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.2 / 10
3.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-05 16:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
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
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities18 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle~6.0 || ~7.0composer.json
Packagistbeberlei/assert^2.9.9composer.json
All dependencies 37

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 35 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistbeberlei/assert2.9.9direct
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle6.5.8direct
Packagistdoctrine/instantiator1.0.5indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/promises1.5.3indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr71.9.1indirect
Packagistmyclabs/deep-copy1.7.0indirect
Packagistparagonie/random_compat2.0.21indirect
Packagistphpdocumentor/reflection-common1.0.1indirect
Packagistphpdocumentor/reflection-docblock3.3.2indirect
Packagistphpdocumentor/type-resolver0.4.0indirect
Packagistphpspec/prophecy1.10.3indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-code-coverage4.0.8indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-file-iterator1.4.5indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-text-template1.2.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-timer1.0.9indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-token-stream1.4.12indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit5.7.27indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit-mock-objects3.4.4indirect
Packagistpsr/http-message1.0.1indirect
Packagistralouphie/getallheaders3.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit-reverse-lookup1.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/comparator1.2.4indirect
Packagistsebastian/diff1.4.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/environment2.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/exporter2.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/global-state1.1.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-enumerator2.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/recursion-context2.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/resource-operations1.0.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/version2.0.1indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-ctype1.19.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-idn1.19.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-intl-normalizer1.19.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php701.19.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/polyfill-php721.19.0indirect
Packagistsymfony/yaml3.4.47indirect
Packagistwebmozart/assert1.9.1indirect
Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 37 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
guzzlehttp/guzzle6.5.8directhigh98.0.1
phpunit/phpunit5.7.27indirecthigh112.5.8
guzzlehttp/psr71.9.1indirectmoderate42.12.3
symfony/polyfill-intl-idn1.19.0indirectmoderate11.38.1
symfony/yaml3.4.47indirectmoderate38.0.12

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 statisticsPackagist.