Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-03 01:25 UTC

jgnagy / bullion

Ruby ACME v2 Certificate Issuer

RubyMIT★ 2 stars⑂ 1 forksince Jul 2020View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolNetwork servicehow this is determined

jgnagy/bullion holds a health index of 73 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (44/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

73
overall / 100
Good

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.

73
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 64 is calibrated to 73 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Jonathan GnagyPersonal account
19 followers82 public repossince Mar 2011

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 publish
RubyGemsbullion0.11.6-320 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence — 15/52 weeks with commits
16.3/18Commit volume — 65 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year65
human_commit_share0.84
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year15
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 13 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~50.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count13
latest_release_tagbullion/v0.11.6
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases50.4
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?

44Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 2 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars2
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
45.8/80Total downloads — 25,700 downloads all-time across rubygems
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbullion
dependents—
ecosystemsrubygems
total_downloads25,700
monthly_downloads—
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?

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.993
How it's scored
32/42Issue resolution — 76% of issues closed
20.8/30PR acceptance — 66/95 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs66
open_issues5
closed_issues16
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d7
prs_decided_30d7
issue_closed_ratio0.762
closed_unmerged_prs29
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
9.4/25Owner reach — 19 followers of jgnagy
25/25Track record — 82 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers19
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginjgnagy
public_repos82
account_age_days5,684
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on rubygems
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 32 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbullion
ecosystemsrubygems
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

74Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .rubocop.yml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 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

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsacme-v2, ruby, bullion, certificate-authority, acme, certificate, letsencrypt
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

64Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 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 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
advisories2
affected_packages2
assessed_packages109
unassessed_packages27
affected_by_severityhigh 1, low 1
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 109 resolved dependencies against OSV. 27 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.

66Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 83 of 84 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.988
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes2,789
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .rubocop.yml
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 16 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesGemfile.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.16
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Ruby without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/52 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRuby
largest_source_bytes19,214
source_files_sampled52
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2GitHub stars
2contributors
65commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
13releases
1bus factor
5open issues
RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-10-03 01:25 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-Tests11 out of 11 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 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow 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
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 136

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 136 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
RubyGemsacme-client—indirect
RubyGemsacme-client2.0.32indirect
RubyGemsactivemodel8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactiverecord8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsactivesupport8.1.3indirect
RubyGemsast2.4.3indirect
RubyGemsbackport1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsbase640.3.0indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark—indirect
RubyGemsbenchmark0.5.0indirect
RubyGemsbigdecimal4.1.2indirect
RubyGemsbundler—indirect
RubyGemsbyebug—indirect
RubyGemsbyebug13.0.0indirect
RubyGemscommander5.0.0indirect
RubyGemsconcurrent-ruby1.3.7indirect
RubyGemsconnection_pool3.0.2indirect
RubyGemscsv3.3.5indirect
RubyGemsdate3.5.1indirect
RubyGemsdiff-lcs1.6.2indirect
RubyGemsdocile1.4.1indirect
RubyGemsdrb2.2.3indirect
RubyGemsdry-configurable—indirect
RubyGemsdry-configurable1.4.0indirect
RubyGemsdry-core1.2.0indirect
RubyGemsed255191.4.0indirect
RubyGemserb6.0.4indirect
RubyGemsfaraday2.14.3indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-net_http3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsfaraday-retry2.4.0indirect
RubyGemshighline3.0.1indirect
RubyGemshttparty—indirect
RubyGemshttparty0.24.2indirect
RubyGemsi18n1.15.2indirect
RubyGemsio-console0.8.2indirect
RubyGemsitsi—indirect
RubyGemsitsi0.2.27indirect
RubyGemsitsi-scheduler0.2.27indirect
RubyGemsitsi-server0.2.27indirect
RubyGemsjaro_winkler1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsjson—indirect
RubyGemsjson2.20.0indirect
RubyGemsjwt—indirect
RubyGemsjwt3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsjwt-eddsa—indirect
RubyGemsjwt-eddsa0.9.0indirect
RubyGemskramdown2.5.2indirect
RubyGemskramdown-parser-gfm1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslanguage_server-protocol3.17.0.6indirect
RubyGemslint_roller1.1.0indirect
RubyGemslogger1.7.0indirect
RubyGemsmini_mime1.1.5indirect
RubyGemsminitest6.0.6indirect
RubyGemsmulti_json1.21.1indirect
RubyGemsmulti_xml0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsmustermann3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsnet-http0.9.1indirect
RubyGemsnokogiri1.19.4indirect
RubyGemsobserver0.1.2indirect
RubyGemsopen30.2.1indirect
RubyGemsopenssl—indirect
RubyGemsopenssl4.0.2indirect
RubyGemsostruct0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsparallel2.1.0indirect
RubyGemsparlour9.1.2indirect
RubyGemsparser3.3.11.1indirect
RubyGemsprism1.9.0indirect
RubyGemsprometheus-client—indirect
RubyGemsprometheus-client4.2.5indirect
RubyGemspsych5.4.0indirect
RubyGemsracc1.8.1indirect
RubyGemsrack3.2.6indirect
RubyGemsrack-protection4.2.1indirect
RubyGemsrack-session2.1.2indirect
RubyGemsrack-test—indirect
RubyGemsrack-test2.2.0indirect
RubyGemsrainbow3.1.1indirect
RubyGemsrake—indirect
RubyGemsrake13.4.2indirect
RubyGemsrake-compiler-dock1.12.0indirect
RubyGemsrb_sys0.9.128indirect
RubyGemsrbs4.0.3indirect
RubyGemsrdoc7.2.0indirect
RubyGemsregexp_parser2.12.0indirect
RubyGemsreline0.6.3indirect
RubyGemsreverse_markdown3.0.2indirect
RubyGemsrexml3.4.4indirect
RubyGemsrspec—indirect
RubyGemsrspec3.13.2indirect
RubyGemsrspec-core3.13.6indirect
RubyGemsrspec-expectations3.13.5indirect
RubyGemsrspec-mocks3.13.8indirect
RubyGemsrspec-support3.13.7indirect
RubyGemsrubocop—indirect
RubyGemsrubocop1.88.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-ast1.50.0indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rake—indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rake0.7.1indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec—indirect
RubyGemsrubocop-rspec3.10.2indirect
RubyGemsruby-progressbar1.13.0indirect
RubyGemssecurerandom0.4.1indirect
RubyGemssimplecov—indirect
RubyGemssimplecov0.22.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-cobertura—indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-cobertura2.1.0indirect
RubyGemssimplecov-html0.13.2indirect
RubyGemssimplecov_json_formatter0.1.4indirect
RubyGemssinatra—indirect
RubyGemssinatra4.2.1indirect
RubyGemssinatra-activerecord—indirect
RubyGemssinatra-activerecord2.0.28indirect
RubyGemssinatra-contrib—indirect
RubyGemssinatra-contrib4.2.1indirect
RubyGemssolargraph—indirect
RubyGemssolargraph0.60.2indirect
RubyGemssorbet-runtime0.6.13323indirect
RubyGemssord7.1.0indirect
RubyGemssqlite3—indirect
RubyGemssqlite32.9.5indirect
RubyGemsstringio3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsthor1.5.0indirect
RubyGemstilt2.8.0indirect
RubyGemstimeout0.6.1indirect
RubyGemstrilogy—indirect
RubyGemstrilogy2.12.6indirect
RubyGemstsort0.2.0indirect
RubyGemstzinfo2.0.6indirect
RubyGemsunicode-display_width3.2.0indirect
RubyGemsunicode-emoji4.2.0indirect
RubyGemsuri1.1.1indirect
RubyGemsyard—indirect
RubyGemsyard0.9.44indirect
RubyGemsyard-activesupport-concern0.0.1indirect
RubyGemsyard-solargraph0.1.0indirect
RubyGemszeitwerk2.8.2indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 109 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 27 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
sqlite32.9.5indirecthigh12.9.6
json2.20.0indirectlow12.21.2

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 — RubyGems.