Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-26 12:28 UTC

integritychain / fips204

Pure Rust implementation of FIPS 204 Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Standard for server, desktop, browser and embedded applications.

Rust · PythonApache-2.0★ 31 stars⑂ 7 forkssince Dec 2023View on GitHub ↗

integritychain/fips204 holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Security (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (52/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

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.

80
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 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

integritychainPersonal account
14 followers21 public repossince Nov 2015

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
crates.iofips2040.5.0213,513142 days agosignaturepost-quantumdilithiumfips204ml-dsacryptographyno-std
crates.iofips204-ffi0.5.0312 days agoffisignaturepost-quantumfips204ml-dsacryptography

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

72Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 100 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year100
human_commit_share0.98
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year7
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 2 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
5.4/27Release cadence — a release every ~749 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tagv0.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases749
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?

52Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
24/60Stars — 31 stars
6.5/25Forks — 7 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars31
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
71.1/80Monthly downloads — 213,516 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfips204, fips204-ffi
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads1,234,856
monthly_downloads213,516
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?

61Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 57% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.575
How it's scored
38.2/42Issue resolution — 91% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 16/16 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs16
open_issues1
closed_issues10
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d6
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.909
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): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
8.5/25Owner reach — 14 followers of integritychain
21.8/25Track record — 21 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers14
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginintegritychain
public_repos21
account_age_days3,990
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history — 14 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfips204, fips204-ffi
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/fips204
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/fips204
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

81Excellent · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages30
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 1 resolved dependencies against OSV. 30 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.

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.

68Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
37/40Legible commit history — 68 of 98 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.694
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — ffi/tests/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 2 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesffi/tests/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, ct_cm4/Cargo.toml, dudect/Cargo.toml, ffi/Cargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml, wasm/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.02
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/37 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes43,366
source_files_sampled37
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

31GitHub stars
4contributors
100commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
2releases
1bus factor
1open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch crates package 'fips204-wasm' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'fips204-ct_cm4' from its registry
  • Could not fetch crates package 'fips204-dudect' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 7 ⇿
0Stars
7Forks
1Releases

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.

1234567712024-072025-082026-09
Major 0Minor 0Patch 1

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.6 / 10
7.6aggregate

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 · 2026-10-26 12:28 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/24 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 25
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iorand_core0.6.4Cargo.toml
crates.iosha30.10.9Cargo.toml
crates.iozeroize1.6.0Cargo.toml
crates.iofips204—ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iocortex-m0.7.7ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iocortex-m-rt0.7.3ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iopanic-rtt-target0.1.2ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iomicrobit-v20.13.0ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iortt-target0.5.0ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand_core0.6.4ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex-literal0.4.1ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iofixed=1.30.0ct_cm4/Cargo.toml
crates.iofips204—dudect/Cargo.toml
crates.iodudect-bencher0.6dudect/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand_core0.6.4dudect/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand_core0.6.4ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.iopastey>=0.1, <0.3ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.iofips2040.5.0ffi/Cargo.toml
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2.128wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iofips204—wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand_chacha0.3.1wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.ioconsole_error_panic_hook0.1.7wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.8.5wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iogetrandom0.2wasm/Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4.3wasm/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 31

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 19 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioconsole_error_panic_hook—direct
crates.iocortex-m—direct
crates.iocortex-m-rt—direct
crates.iodudect-bencher—direct
crates.iofips204—direct
crates.iofixed1.30.0direct
crates.iogetrandom—direct
crates.iohex—direct
crates.iohex-literal—direct
crates.iomicrobit-v2—direct
crates.iopanic-rtt-target—direct
crates.iopastey—direct
crates.iorand—direct
crates.iorand_chacha—direct
crates.iorand_core—direct
crates.iortt-target—direct
crates.iosha3—direct
crates.iowasm-bindgen—direct
crates.iozeroize—direct
crates.iocriterion—indirect
crates.ioflate2—indirect
crates.iolibfuzzer-sys—indirect
crates.ioregex—indirect
crates.ioserde_json—indirect
crates.iosha2—indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-test—indirect
npmcopy-webpack-plugin^14.0.0indirect
npmwebpack^5.101.0indirect
npmwebpack-cli^7.2.3indirect
npmwebpack-dev-server^6.0.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 30 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

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 statistics — crates.io.