Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 01:10 UTC

mayeut / pybase64

Fast Base64 encoding/decoding in Python

Python · CBSD-2-Clause★ 181 stars⑂ 20 forkssince Feb 2017View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#base64#simd#python#python-library

mayeut/pybase64 holds a health index of 86 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (86/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (49/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

86
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.

86
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 72 is calibrated to 86 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Matthieu DarboisPersonal account
67 followers103 public repossince Nov 2014

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
PyPIpybase641.4.3-27222 days agobase64

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

81Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

94Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
30.5/36Commit cadence — 44/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 164 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year164
human_commit_share—
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year44

Release discipline

62Moderate
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 28 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 222 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~160.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count28
latest_release_tagv1.4.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release222
mean_days_between_releases160.3
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?

49Weak · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

49Weak
How it's scored
36.6/60Stars — 181 stars
10.7/25Forks — 20 forks
1.7/15Watchers — 3 watchers
Inputs used
forks20
stars181
watchers3
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

50Moderate
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (BSD-2-Clause)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

69Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

59Moderate
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
13.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 38% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 10 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled10
top_contributor_share0.382

Issue & PR responsiveness

73Good
How it's scored
39.3/42Issue resolution — 94% of issues closed
24.3/30PR acceptance — 816/1,007 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs816
open_issues2
closed_issues29
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.935
closed_unmerged_prs191
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

60Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
13.2/25Owner reach — 67 followers of mayeut
25/25Track record — 103 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers67
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginmayeut
public_repos103
account_age_days4,261
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

91Excellent
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
26/35Publish recency — latest publish 222 days ago
20/20Version history — 27 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagespybase64
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish222

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 22 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

75Good
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbase64, simd, python, python-library
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

73Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

73Good
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
6/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 22 out of 22 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 0/16 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
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 26 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
4.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
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
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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

Agent context & guidance

1Critical
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

96Exceptional
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — docs/Makefile, noxfile.py
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — src/pybase64/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no data
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
9/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile, noxfile.py
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/pybase64/py.typed
agent_commit_share—
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/pybase64/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/21 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes56,615
source_files_sampled21
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

181GitHub stars
10contributors
164commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
28releases
2bus factor
2open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10
7.3aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 01:10 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests22 out of 22 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 0/16 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
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained26 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
9Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 9
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 63

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 63 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaccessible-pygments0.0.5indirect
PyPIalabaster1.0.0indirect
PyPIargcomplete3.7.0indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbabel2.18.0indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.15.0indirect
PyPIcertifi2026.6.17indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcolorlog6.10.1indirect
PyPIcoverage7.15.0indirect
PyPIdependency-groups1.3.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdocutils0.22.4indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.19.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.29.7indirect
PyPIfuro2025.12.19indirect
PyPIgcovr8.6indirect
PyPIhumanize4.13.0indirect
PyPIhumanize4.16.0indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIimagesize2.0.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.1.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIlxml6.1.1indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPInox2026.4.10indirect
PyPIpackaging24.2indirect
PyPIpackaging26.2indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.10.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.4.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprek0.4.8indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpytest8.4.2indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-codspeed5.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-run-parallel0.9.1indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.4.4indirect
PyPIrequests2.34.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIroman-numerals4.1.0indirect
PyPIsetuptools82.0.1indirect
PyPIsetuptools83.0.0indirect
PyPIsnowballstemmer3.1.1indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.8.4indirect
PyPIsphinx9.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinx-basic-ng1.0.0b2indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-applehelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-devhelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-htmlhelp2.1.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-jsmath1.0.1indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-qthelp2.0.0indirect
PyPIsphinxcontrib-serializinghtml2.0.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.6.0indirect
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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with mayeut/pybase64. Read them side by side →

98mongodb/mongo-python-driverPyMongo - the Official MongoDB Python driverExceptional97celery/celeryDistributed Task Queue (development branch)Exceptional96blacklanternsecurity/bbotThe recursive internet scanner for hackers. 🧡Exceptional100psf/blackThe uncompromising Python code formatterExceptional100scikit-learn/scikit-learnscikit-learn: machine learning in PythonExceptional100numpy/numpyThe fundamental package for scientific computing with Python.Exceptional

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.