Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-11 13:20 UTC

mas-bandwidth / yojimbo

A network library for client/server games written in C++

C++ · CBSD-3-Clause★ 2,733 stars⑂ 278 forkssince May 2016View on GitHub ↗

mas-bandwidth/yojimbo holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (84/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (50/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

78
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 67 is calibrated to 78 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Más Bandwidth LLCOrganization
156 followers54 public repossince Jul 2023

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

84Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
10.4/36Commit cadence — 15/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 252 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year252
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year15

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 46 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~5.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count46
latest_release_tagv1.13.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases5.2
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?

80Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
55.7/60Stars — 2,733 stars
20.4/25Forks — 278 forks
11.5/15Watchers — 116 watchers
Inputs used
forks278
stars2,733
watchers116
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-3-Clause)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

57Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 91% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 41 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled41
top_contributor_share0.912
How it's scored
40.1/42Issue resolution — 96% of issues closed
26.4/30PR acceptance — 169/192 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs169
open_issues7
closed_issues148
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d11
prs_decided_30d11
issue_closed_ratio0.955
closed_unmerged_prs23
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 backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
15.8/25Owner reach — 156 followers of mas-bandwidth
19/25Track record — 54 public repos, account ~3 yr old
Inputs used
followers156
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginmas-bandwidth
public_repos54
account_age_days1,161

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

50Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 19 out of 19 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

60Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsclient-server, udp, protocol, game, multiplayer-game-server
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?

67Good · 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 — 19 out of 19 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 1/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
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
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: golang.org/x/crypto v0.53.0 (unknown)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
40/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory has been public longer than 90 days
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages1
assessed_packages4
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityunknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 4 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.

68Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 88 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.88
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes14,781
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — matcher/go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C++ (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 57 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.57
toolchain_manifestsmatcher/go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C++ (statically typed)
51.4/55Manageable file sizes — 5/77 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC++
largest_source_bytes529,592
source_files_sampled77
oversized_source_files5

Key facts

2,733GitHub stars
41contributors
252commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
46releases
1bus factor
7open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/mas-bandwidth/matcher' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 278 ⇿
0Stars
278Forks
26Releases

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.

050100150200250300272172016-072021-072026-08
Major 0Minor 8Patch 10

Each point covers 10 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
6.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-11 13:20 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests19 out of 19 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 1/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 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
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/go-chi/chi/v5v5.3.0matcher/go.mod
Gogithub.com/pkg/errorsv0.9.1matcher/go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.53.0matcher/go.mod
All dependencies 4

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 1 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/go-chi/chi/v5v5.3.0direct
Gogithub.com/pkg/errorsv0.9.1direct
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.53.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.46.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 4 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/cryptov0.53.0directunknown40.56.0

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.