Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-26 10:19 UTC

mullvad / domain-fronting

A rust crate for driving TCP connections over HTTP CDNs.

RustGPL-3.0★ 10 stars⑂ 1 forksince Feb 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

mullvad/domain-fronting holds a health index of 57 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (70/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (35/100). It was last updated 2 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

57
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.

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

Ownership

Mullvad VPNOrganization
3,975 followers119 public repossince Feb 2015

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iodomain-fronting0.2.011,02722 days agodomain-frontingnetworkingnetwork-programming

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

66Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 2 days ago
5.5/36Commit cadence — 8/52 weeks with commits
14/18Commit volume — 35 commits in the last year
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
commits_last_year35
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push2
active_weeks_last_year8
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 2 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~147.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tagv0.2.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases147.8
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?

41Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
15.5/60Stars — 10 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars10
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (GPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
53.9/80Monthly downloads — 11,027 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdomain-fronting
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads50,461
monthly_downloads11,027
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?

70Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.2/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 46% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.457
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
24/30PR acceptance — 4/5 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 4/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs4
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs1
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 3,975 followers of mullvad
25/25Track record — 119 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers3,975
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginmullvad
public_repos119
account_age_days4,251
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 2 days ago
12/20Version history — 2 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdomain-fronting
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

48Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 4 out of 4 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

55Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/domain-fronting
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
homepage—
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/domain-fronting
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

45Weak · 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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 4 out of 4 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
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 4/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
0.8/2.5Contributors — project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
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
5.2/7.5Maintained — 9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
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
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
3/7.5Vulnerabilities — 6 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, 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.

35Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
4.6/40Legible commit history — 3 of 35 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.086
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 35
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
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/8 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes28,799
source_files_sampled8
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

10GitHub stars
3contributors
35commits, last 12 months
2days since last push
2releases
2bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
  • deps.dev does not index crates:domain-fronting@0.2.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-26 10:19 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests4 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
4Code-ReviewFound 4/10 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
7Maintained9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
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
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
4Vulnerabilities6 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 20
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioanyhow1.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioasync-trait0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iobytes1.2Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iohttp1.1.0Cargo.toml
crates.iohttp-body-util0.1.2Cargo.toml
crates.iohyper1.8.1Cargo.toml
crates.iohyper-util0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iolog0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror2.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.42Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-util0.7.18Cargo.toml
crates.iouuid1.4.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioclap4.5Cargo.toml
crates.iorustls0.23Cargo.toml
crates.iorustls-pki-types1.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-rustls0.26.0Cargo.toml
crates.iotracing-subscriber0.3Cargo.toml
crates.iowebpki-roots1.0.7Cargo.toml
crates.iokameo0.22.1Cargo.toml
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 — crates.io.