Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 18:47 UTC

mediachain / aleph

א: The mediachain universe manipulation engine

JavaScriptMIT★ 39 stars⑂ 15 forkssince Aug 2016View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

mediachain/aleph holds a health index of 21 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (54/100) and lowest on Security (21/100). It was last updated 2292 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

21
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

21
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 40 is calibrated to 35 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

MediachainOrganization
15 followers29 public repossince Jan 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
npmaleph1.7.030123469 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

25At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 2,292 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push2,292
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 10 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 3,469 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~14.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count10
latest_release_tagv1.7.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release3,469
mean_days_between_releases14.5
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?

46Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
25.6/60Stars — 39 stars
9.6/25Forks — 15 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks15
stars39
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonbelow_threshold
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesbadge.fury.io, coveralls.io, shields.io, travis-ci.org
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
19.9/80Monthly downloads — 30 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesaleph
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads30
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?

53Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
2.7/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 88% 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_share0.878
How it's scored
28.2/42Issue resolution — 67% of issues closed
20.1/30PR acceptance — 125/187 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 5/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs125
open_issues24
closed_issues49
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.671
closed_unmerged_prs62
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
8.7/25Owner reach — 15 followers of mediachain
22.8/25Track record — 29 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers15
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginmediachain
public_repos29
account_age_days3,893
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
4/35Publish recency — latest publish 3,469 days ago
20/20Version history — 12 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesaleph
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish3,469

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

54Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — package.json ("standard")
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
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?

21At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-Review — Found 5/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 120 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated14
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive4
scorecard_aggregate2.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
4.3/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 5 affected: knex 0.12.9 (critical 9.8), libp2p-secio 0.6.8 (critical 9.1), node-fetch 1.7.3 (high 8.8), +2 more
1.5/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 16 affected: decompress 3.0.0 (critical 9.8), minimist 1.1.3 (critical 9.8), braces 1.8.5 (high 7.5), +13 more
8.8/40No advisories left outstanding — 20 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2,658 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories28
affected_packages21
assessed_packages644
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 4, high 10, moderate 7
direct_affected_packages5
Matched the npm:aleph@1.7.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 644 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.

39Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
12.9/40Legible commit history — 23 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.242
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — package.json ("standard")
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 5 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
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.05
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/121 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes29,711
source_files_sampled121
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — src/protobuf/dir.proto, src/protobuf/manifest.proto, src/protobuf/node.proto, src/protobuf/stmt.proto
0/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filessrc/protobuf/dir.proto, src/protobuf/manifest.proto, src/protobuf/node.proto, src/protobuf/stmt.proto
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

39GitHub stars
4contributors
0commits, last 12 months
2,292days since last push
10releases
1bus factor
24open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Star history carried forward from 2025-08-25: GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository admins, so it can no longer be collected. The repository has 39 stars today.

More detail

Star and fork history 39 ★ / 15 ⇿
39Stars
15Forks
10Releases

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.

Star history is shown as collected on 2025-08-25. GitHub restricted the stargazers API to repository administrators in July 2026, so this series can no longer be extended; the current star total above remains live.

010203040391552016-102021-032025-08
Major 0Minor 7Patch 3

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.3 / 10
2.3aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 18:47 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 5/6 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 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
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
0Vulnerabilities120 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 44
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmajv^4.9.2package.json
npmbin-build^2.2.0package.json
npmborc^2.0.1package.json
npmbyline^5.0.0package.json
npmdigest-stream^2.0.0package.json
npmduplex-child-process0.0.5package.json
npmgunzip-maybe^1.3.1package.json
npmknex^0.12.6package.json
npmlevelup^1.3.3package.json
npmlibp2p-crypto^0.8.0package.json
npmlibp2p-ping^0.3.0package.json
npmlibp2p-secio^0.6.4package.json
npmlibp2p-spdy^0.10.1package.json
npmlibp2p-swarm^0.26.2package.json
npmlibp2p-tcp^0.9.1package.json
npmlibp2p-websockets^0.9.1package.json
npmlocks^0.2.2package.json
npmlodash^4.17.1package.json
npmmafmt^2.1.5package.json
npmmap-stream^0.0.6package.json
npmmemdown^1.2.4package.json
npmmkdirp^0.5.1package.json
npmmultiaddr^2.1.3package.json
npmmultihashes^0.4.3package.json
npmndjson^1.4.3package.json
npmnode-fetch^1.6.3package.json
npmpeer-book^0.3.0package.json
npmpeer-id^0.8.0package.json
npmpeer-info^0.8.0package.json
npmprotocol-buffers^3.2.0package.json
npmpull-abortable^4.1.0package.json
npmpull-length-prefixed^1.2.0package.json
npmpull-paramap^1.2.1package.json
npmpull-promise^2.0.0package.json
npmpull-pushable^2.0.1package.json
npmpull-stream^3.5.0package.json
npmpull-window^2.1.4package.json
npmsqlite3^3.1.8package.json
npmtar-streamhttps://registry.npmjs.org/tar-stream/-/tar-stream-1.5.2.tgzpackage.json
npmtemp^0.8.3package.json
npmthenify-all^1.6.0package.json
npmtunnel-ssh^4.1.1package.json
npmuuid^3.0.1package.json
npmyargs^6.3.0package.json
All dependencies 64

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 43 direct and 21 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmajv^4.9.2direct
npmbin-build^2.2.0direct
npmborc^2.0.1direct
npmbyline^5.0.0direct
npmdigest-stream^2.0.0direct
npmduplex-child-process0.0.5direct
npmgunzip-maybe^1.3.1direct
npmknex^0.12.6direct
npmlevelup^1.3.3direct
npmlibp2p-crypto^0.8.0direct
npmlibp2p-ping^0.3.0direct
npmlibp2p-secio^0.6.4direct
npmlibp2p-spdy^0.10.1direct
npmlibp2p-swarm^0.26.2direct
npmlibp2p-tcp^0.9.1direct
npmlibp2p-websockets^0.9.1direct
npmlocks^0.2.2direct
npmlodash^4.17.1direct
npmmafmt^2.1.5direct
npmmap-stream^0.0.6direct
npmmemdown^1.2.4direct
npmmkdirp^0.5.1direct
npmmultiaddr^2.1.3direct
npmmultihashes^0.4.3direct
npmndjson^1.4.3direct
npmnode-fetch^1.6.3direct
npmpeer-book^0.3.0direct
npmpeer-id^0.8.0direct
npmpeer-info^0.8.0direct
npmprotocol-buffers^3.2.0direct
npmpull-abortable^4.1.0direct
npmpull-length-prefixed^1.2.0direct
npmpull-paramap^1.2.1direct
npmpull-promise^2.0.0direct
npmpull-pushable^2.0.1direct
npmpull-stream^3.5.0direct
npmpull-window^2.1.4direct
npmsqlite3^3.1.8direct
npmtemp^0.8.3direct
npmthenify-all^1.6.0direct
npmtunnel-ssh^4.1.1direct
npmuuid^3.0.1direct
npmyargs^6.3.0direct
npmbabel-cli^6.22.0indirect
npmbabel-eslint^7.1.0indirect
npmbabel-plugin-istanbul^3.1.2indirect
npmbabel-plugin-transform-flow-strip-types^6.22.0indirect
npmbabel-register^6.22.0indirect
npmchai^3.5.0indirect
npmchai-as-promised^6.0.0indirect
npmcoveralls^2.11.15indirect
npmeslint-plugin-flowtype^2.30.3indirect
npmflow-bin^0.41.0indirect
npmgh-pages^0.12.0indirect
npmink-docstrap^1.3.0indirect
npminterface-connection^0.3.0indirect
npmjsdoc^3.4.3indirect
npmjsdoc-babel^0.3.0indirect
npmmocha^3.2.0indirect
npmmocha-eventually^1.1.0indirect
npmmocha-lcov-reporter^1.2.0indirect
npmnyc^10.0.0indirect
npmstandard^8.6.0indirect
npmstd-mocks^1.0.1indirect
Dependency advisories 21

Installing npm:aleph@1.7.0 pulls in 644 packages, direct and transitive: 21 carry known advisories, of which 5 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
knex0.12.9directcritical22.4.0
libp2p-secio0.6.8directcritical10.9.0
decompress3.0.0indirectcritical411.1.3
minimist1.1.3indirectcritical21.2.6
node-fetch1.7.3directhigh13.1.1
uuid3.4.0directhigh113.0.1
braces1.8.5indirecthigh13.0.3
elliptic6.6.1indirecthigh1—
ip1.1.9indirecthigh1—
lodash.template3.6.2indirecthigh14.17.21
semver5.4.1indirecthigh17.5.2
url-regex3.2.0indirecthigh1—
uuid2.0.3indirecthigh113.0.1
ws1.1.5indirecthigh18.21.0
ajv4.11.8directmoderate28.18.0
bn.js1.3.0indirectmoderate15.2.3
got5.7.1indirectmoderate112.1.0
ip-address5.9.4indirectmoderate210.3.1
micromatch2.3.11indirectmoderate14.0.8
tunnel-agent0.4.3indirectmoderate10.6.0
yargs-parser4.2.1indirectmoderate118.1.1

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 — npm.