Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-06 17:17 UTC

nearform / fastify-secrets-core

Simplify development of fastify-secrets plugins

JavaScriptCustom license★ 2 stars⑂ 2 forkssince Oct 2020View on GitHub ↗

nearform/fastify-secrets-core holds a health index of 65 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (83/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (45/100). It was last updated 14 days ago. 4 contributors account for most of its recent work.

65
overall / 100
Good

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.

65
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 60 is calibrated to 65 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

NearformOrganization · verified domain
350 followers376 public repossince Mar 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
npmfastify-secrets-core4.0.04,59513456 days agofastifysecrets

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

47Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 14 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
7.6/18Commit volume — 6 commits in the last year
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
commits_last_year6
human_commit_share0.31
days_since_last_push14
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 9 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 456 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~146.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count9
latest_release_tagv4.0.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release456
mean_days_between_releases146.8
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?

47Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 2 stars
0/25Forks — 2 forks
10.4/15Watchers — 76 watchers
Inputs used
forks2
stars2
watchers76
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
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
48.8/80Monthly downloads — 4,595 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesfastify-secrets-core
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads4,595
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?

83Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
43.2/54Bus factor — 4 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
16.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 26% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 25 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor4
contributors_sampled25
top_contributor_share0.265
How it's scored
38.4/42Issue resolution — 91% of issues closed
19.9/30PR acceptance — 204/307 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 7/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs204
open_issues3
closed_issues32
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.914
closed_unmerged_prs103
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
20/20Verified domain
18.3/25Owner reach — 350 followers of nearform
25/25Track record — 376 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers350
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginnearform
public_repos376
account_age_days5,317
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 456 days ago
20/20Version history — 13 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesfastify-secrets-core
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish456

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — eslint.config.js
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 7 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikino
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?

64Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0.5/2.5CI-Tests — 7 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-Review — Found 7/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
3.8/7.5Maintained — 6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages4
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:fastify-secrets-core@4.0.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 4 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 31 of 31 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — eslint.config.js
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 58 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_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.58
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes16,256
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2GitHub stars
25contributors
6commits, last 12 months
14days since last push
9releases
4bus factor
3open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 2 ⇿
0Stars
2Forks
2Releases

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.

111222212024-102025-052025-12
Major 2Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.5 / 10
5.5aggregate

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 · 2026-10-06 17:16 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
2CI-Tests7 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 7/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
5Maintained6 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 5
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmfastify-plugin^6.0.0package.json
npmp-map^7.0.3package.json
npmp-props^6.0.0package.json
All dependencies 13

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmfastify-plugin^6.0.0direct
npmp-map^7.0.3direct
npmp-props^6.0.0direct
npmc8^12.0.0indirect
npmeslint^10.10.0indirect
npmeslint-config-prettier^10.1.5indirect
npmeslint-plugin-import-x^4.17.1indirect
npmeslint-plugin-prettier^5.5.1indirect
npmglobals^17.3.0indirect
npmhusky^9.1.7indirect
npmlint-staged^17.4.1indirect
npmneostandard0.14.0-next.1indirect
npmprettier^3.6.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:fastify-secrets-core@4.0.0 pulls in 4 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 — npm.