Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 23:31 UTC

mwiede / jsch

fork of the popular jsch library

JavaCustom license★ 1,065 stars⑂ 197 forkssince May 2020View on GitHub ↗

mwiede/jsch holds a health index of 87 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (61/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

87
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.

87
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 73 is calibrated to 87 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Matthias WiedemannPersonal account
44 followers42 public repossince Mar 2012Swisslife

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.mwiede:jsch2.28.8-629 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
33.9/36Commit cadence — 49/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 348 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year348
human_commit_share0.32
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year49

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 60 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 9 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~23.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count60
latest_release_tagjsch-2.28.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release9
mean_days_between_releases23.4
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?

61Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
49.1/60Stars — 1,065 stars
19.1/25Forks — 197 forks
8/15Watchers — 29 watchers
Inputs used
forks197
stars1,065
watchers29
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
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

Sustainability & Governance

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

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 55% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 31 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled31
top_contributor_share0.554
How it's scored
28/42Issue resolution — 67% of issues closed
26.5/30PR acceptance — 745/842 decided PRs merged
8.7/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 2/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 3/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs745
open_issues112
closed_issues223
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio0.666
closed_unmerged_prs97
first_time_authors_30d3
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
11.9/25Owner reach — 44 followers of mwiede
23.9/25Track record — 42 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers44
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginmwiede
public_repos42
account_age_days5,324
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on maven
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 9 days ago
20/20Version history — 62 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescom.github.mwiede:jsch
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish9

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

65Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 15 out of 15 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
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 — 5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsjsch, openssh, ssh, java, ssh-client
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

78Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 15 out of 15 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 3/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
4/5SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages46
unassessed_packages9
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 46 resolved dependencies against OSV. 9 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

69Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
26.7/40Legible commit history — 16 of 32 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.5
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)
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 49 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.49
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Java (statically typed)
54.6/55Manageable file sizes — 3/402 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes130,590
source_files_sampled402
oversized_source_files3
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

1,065GitHub stars
31contributors
348commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
60releases
1bus factor
112open 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 ★ / 197 ⇿
0Stars
197Forks
60Releases

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.

0408012016020019542020-052023-082026-10
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.2 / 10
7.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-19 23:30 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests15 out of 15 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 3/7 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 10 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 7 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
8SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk18on1.86pom.xml
Mavencom.kohlschutter.junixsocket:junixsocket-common${junixsocket.version}pom.xml
Mavennet.java.dev.jna:jna-jpms${jna.version}pom.xml
Mavennet.java.dev.jna:jna-platform-jpms${jna.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-api${log4j.version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api2.0.20pom.xml
Mavencom.google.errorprone:error_prone_annotations${errorprone.version}pom.xml
All dependencies 55

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 48 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.google.errorprone:error_prone_annotations2.50.0direct
Mavencom.kohlschutter.junixsocket:junixsocket-common2.11.1direct
Mavennet.java.dev.jna:jna-jpms5.19.1direct
Mavennet.java.dev.jna:jna-platform-jpms5.19.1direct
Mavenorg.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-api2.26.1direct
Mavenorg.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk18on1.86direct
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api2.0.20direct
Mavenbiz.aQute.bnd:bnd-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavenbiz.aQute.bnd:bnd-maven-plugin7.4.0indirect
Mavencom.github.valfirst:slf4j-test3.0.3indirect
Mavencom.kohlschutter.junixsocket:junixsocket-native-common2.11.1indirect
Mavencommons-codec:commons-codec1.23.0indirect
Mavencommons-io:commons-io2.22.0indirect
Mavende.thetaphi:forbiddenapis—indirect
Mavende.thetaphi:forbiddenapis3.11indirect
Mavennet.codecrete.windows-api:windowsapi-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavennet.codecrete.windows-api:windowsapi-maven-plugin0.8.9indirect
Mavennet.revelc.code.formatter:formatter-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavennet.revelc.code.formatter:formatter-maven-plugin2.29.0indirect
Mavennet.revelc.code:impsort-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavennet.revelc.code:impsort-maven-plugin1.13.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-core-test2.26.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-assembly-plugin3.8.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-checkstyle-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-checkstyle-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-clean-plugin3.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin2.50.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.16.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-dependency-plugin3.11.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-deploy-plugin3.2.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin3.6.3indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-failsafe-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin3.2.8indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-install-plugin3.2.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin3.5.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.12.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-project-info-reports-plugin3.9.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-release-plugin3.3.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-resources-plugin3.5.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-site-plugin3.22.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.6.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-toolchains-plugin3.3.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-wrapper-plugin3.3.4indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:build-helper-maven-plugin3.6.2indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:flatten-maven-plugin1.8.0indirect
Mavenorg.codehaus.mojo:templating-maven-plugin3.1.1indirect
Mavenorg.cyclonedx:cyclonedx-maven-plugin2.9.3indirect
Mavenorg.jacoco:jacoco-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.jacoco:jacoco-maven-plugin0.8.15indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter5.14.4indirect
Mavenorg.sonatype.central:central-publishing-maven-plugin0.11.0indirect
Mavenorg.spdx:spdx-maven-plugin—indirect
Mavenorg.spdx:spdx-maven-plugin1.0.4indirect
Mavenorg.testcontainers:testcontainers-junit-jupiter2.0.5indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 46 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 9 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 — Maven.