Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-27 12:47 UTC

mcountryman / simd-adler32

A SIMD-accelerated Adler-32 hash algorithm implementation.

RustMIT★ 47 stars⑂ 22 forkssince Apr 2021View on GitHub ↗

mcountryman/simd-adler32 holds a health index of 60 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (66/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (50/100). It was last updated 43 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

60
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

60
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 57 is calibrated to 60 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Marvin CountrymanPersonal account
25 followers67 public repossince May 2013

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.iosimd-adler320.3.1042,617,4701243 days agoadleradler32avx2simdssse3algorithmsno-std

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

53Moderate · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 43 days ago
7.6/36Commit cadence11/52 weeks with commits
14.7/18Commit volume42 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained1 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year42
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push43
active_weeks_last_year11
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases9 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 43 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~240.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tagv0.3.10
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release43
mean_days_between_releases240.2
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?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
27/60Stars47 stars
11/25Forks22 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks22
stars47
watchers5
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_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads42,617,470 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagessimd-adler32
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads349,744,802
monthly_downloads42,617,470
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?

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
4.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 82% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth11 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled11
top_contributor_share0.819
How it's scored
36/42Issue resolution86% of issues closed
27.1/30PR acceptance19/21 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
9/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 8/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
merged_prs19
open_issues1
closed_issues6
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.857
closed_unmerged_prs2
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 backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
10.2/25Owner reach25 followers of mcountryman
25/25Track record67 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers25
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginmcountryman
public_repos67
account_age_days4,862
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 43 days ago
20/20Version history12 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagessimd-adler32
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish43

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

56Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.rustfmt.toml
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests4 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/simd-adler32
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssimd, avx2, ssse3, adler, adler32
has_wikino
homepagehttps://docs.rs/simd-adler32
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/simd-adler32
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

53Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1.2/2.5CI-Tests4 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4.5/7.5Code-ReviewFound 8/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained1 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
3.8/7.5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
18.5/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories2 affected: atty 0.2.14 (low), serde_cbor 0.11.2 (unknown)
36.4/40No advisories left outstanding2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,880 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories4
affected_packages2
assessed_packages69
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitylow 1, unknown 1
direct_affected_packages0
Matched the crates:simd-adler32@0.3.10 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 69 packages. 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.

50Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
32/40Legible commit history60 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.6
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.rustfmt.toml
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
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_testsno
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, fuzz/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/17 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes8,266
source_files_sampled17
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

47GitHub stars
11contributors
42commits, last 12 months
43days since last push
9releases
1bus factor
1open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 22 ⇿
0Stars
22Forks
4Releases

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.

048121620242232021-102024-022026-06
Major 0Minor 0Patch 4

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10
4.4aggregate

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 · 2026-08-27 12:47 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
5CI-Tests4 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6Code-ReviewFound 8/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 6
10Contributorsproject has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained1 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
5Vulnerabilities5 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 78

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 78 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioadler22.0.1indirect
crates.ioadler321.2.0indirect
crates.ioaho-corasick1.0.2indirect
crates.ioarbitrary1.0.0indirect
crates.ioatty0.2.14indirect
crates.ioautocfg1.1.0indirect
crates.iobitflags1.3.2indirect
crates.iobumpalo3.13.0indirect
crates.iocast0.3.0indirect
crates.iocc1.0.67indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.0indirect
crates.ioclap2.34.0indirect
crates.iocriterion0.3.6indirect
crates.iocriterion-plot0.4.5indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-channel0.5.8indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-deque0.8.3indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-epoch0.9.15indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-utils0.8.16indirect
crates.iocsv1.2.2indirect
crates.iocsv-core0.1.10indirect
crates.ioeither1.9.0indirect
crates.iogetrandom0.2.10indirect
crates.iohalf1.8.2indirect
crates.iohermit-abi0.1.19indirect
crates.iohermit-abi0.3.2indirect
crates.ioitertools0.10.5indirect
crates.ioitoa1.0.9indirect
crates.iojs-sys0.3.64indirect
crates.iolazy_static1.4.0indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.147indirect
crates.iolibfuzzer-sys0.4.0indirect
crates.iolog0.4.19indirect
crates.iomemchr2.5.0indirect
crates.iomemoffset0.9.0indirect
crates.ionum-traits0.2.16indirect
crates.ionum_cpus1.16.0indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.18.0indirect
crates.iooorandom11.1.3indirect
crates.ioplotters0.3.5indirect
crates.ioplotters-backend0.3.5indirect
crates.ioplotters-svg0.3.5indirect
crates.ioppv-lite860.2.17indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.66indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.32indirect
crates.iorand0.8.5indirect
crates.iorand_chacha0.3.1indirect
crates.iorand_core0.6.4indirect
crates.iorayon1.7.0indirect
crates.iorayon-core1.11.0indirect
crates.ioregex1.9.1indirect
crates.ioregex-automata0.3.3indirect
crates.ioregex-syntax0.7.4indirect
crates.ioryu1.0.15indirect
crates.iosame-file1.0.6indirect
crates.ioscopeguard1.2.0indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.175indirect
crates.ioserde_cbor0.11.2indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.175indirect
crates.ioserde_json1.0.103indirect
crates.iosimd-adler320.3.2-alpha.0indirect
crates.iosimd-adler32-fuzz0.0.0indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.27indirect
crates.iotextwrap0.11.0indirect
crates.iotinytemplate1.2.1indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.11indirect
crates.iounicode-width0.1.10indirect
crates.iowalkdir2.3.3indirect
crates.iowasi0.11.0+wasi-snapshot-preview1indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2.87indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-backend0.2.87indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro0.2.87indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro-support0.2.87indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-shared0.2.87indirect
crates.ioweb-sys0.3.64indirect
crates.iowinapi0.3.9indirect
crates.iowinapi-i686-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
crates.iowinapi-util0.1.5indirect
crates.iowinapi-x86_64-pc-windows-gnu0.4.0indirect
Dependency advisories 2

Installing crates:simd-adler32@0.3.10 pulls in 69 packages, direct and transitive: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
atty0.2.14indirectlow3
serde_cbor0.11.2indirectunknown1

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 statisticscrates.io.