Public record
Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.5.0 · 2026-08-04 02:22 UTC

mhshams / jnbis

NIST Biometric Image Software (Java Implementation)

JavaApache-2.0★ 116 stars⑂ 79 forkssince Apr 2015View on GitHub ↗

mhshams/jnbis holds a health index of 22 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Community & Adoption (53/100) and lowest on Vitality (21/100). It was last updated 981 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

22
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.

22
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 41 is calibrated to 36 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Mohammad SarbandiPersonal account
22 followers20 public repossince Dec 2010

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
Mavencom.github.mhshams:jnbis2.1.2-81670 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

21At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recency — last push 981 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_share1
days_since_last_push981
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 5 releases published
0/36Release recency — latest release 1,404 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~68 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count5
latest_release_tagv2.1.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,404
mean_days_between_releases68
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?

53Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
33.4/60Stars — 116 stars
15.8/25Forks — 79 forks
6.2/15Watchers — 14 watchers
Inputs used
forks79
stars116
watchers14
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

49Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 98% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.982
How it's scored
40.1/42Issue resolution — 96% of issues closed
22.5/30PR acceptance — 12/16 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs12
open_issues1
closed_issues21
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.955
closed_unmerged_prs4
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
9.8/25Owner reach — 22 followers of mhshams
21.6/25Track record — 20 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers22
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginmhshams
public_repos20
account_age_days5,712
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on maven
4/35Publish recency — latest publish 1,670 days ago
20/20Version history — 8 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescom.github.mhshams:jnbis
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,670

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

53Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
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 — 4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjava, nist, nist-biometric-image, wsq
has_wikiyes
homepage
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

30At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
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 — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
1.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate2.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): branch_protection, packaging, signed_releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
12.3/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind 2.13.1 (high 8.1)
10/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core 2.13.1 (high 7.5)
28.8/40No advisories left outstanding — 2 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,606 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories10
affected_packages2
assessed_packages3
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the maven:com.github.mhshams:jnbis@2.1.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 3 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.

40Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
1.6/40Legible commit history — 3 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
legible_history_share0.03
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — pom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Java (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
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_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/54 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes48,730
source_files_sampled54
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — samples
Inputs used
example_dirssamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files

Key facts

116GitHub stars
4contributors
0commits, last 12 months
981days since last push
5releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 79 ⇿
0Stars
79Forks
5Releases

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.

0204060807642015-062020-122026-06
Major 0Minor 1Patch 4

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.5 / 10
2.5aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 02:22 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
0CI-Tests0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
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
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
2Vulnerabilities8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind${jackson.version}pom.xml
All dependencies 8

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 7 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind2.14.0-rc2direct
Mavenjunit:junit4.13.2indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.8.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin3.0.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.3.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.2.0indirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-core3.23.1indirect
Mavenorg.moditect:moditect-maven-plugin1.0.0.RC2indirect
Dependency advisories 2

Installing maven:com.github.mhshams:jnbis@2.1.2 pulls in 3 packages, direct and transitive: 2 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind2.13.1directhigh83.1.4
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core2.13.1indirecthigh23.1.4

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

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 v2.5.0, schema v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsMaven.