Public record
Software health reportschema 0.16.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-20 16:40 UTC

nickbabcock / rawzip

A low-level Zip archive reader and writer

RustMIT★ 20 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Jan 2025View on GitHub ↗

nickbabcock/rawzip holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (46/100). It was last updated 7 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Nick BabcockPersonal account
178 followers131 public repossince Aug 2012

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 publishTags
crates.iorawzip0.5.149,325187 days agoarchivezipcompressionfilesystemparser-implementations
crates.iocomparepoints to another repo — not scored0.1.0568,92973630 days agodata-structures

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 7 days ago
15.2/36Commit cadence22/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume205 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year205
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push7
active_weeks_last_year22
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases18 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 7 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~45.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tagv0.5.1
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release7
mean_days_between_releases45.9
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
20.7/60Stars20 stars
2.5/25Forks3 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars20
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
62.6/80Monthly downloads49,325 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesrawzip
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads274,835
monthly_downloads49,325
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?

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 97% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth6 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.972
How it's scored
33.6/42Issue resolution80% of issues closed
29.7/30PR acceptance179/181 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs179
open_issues3
closed_issues12
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.8
closed_unmerged_prs2
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
16.2/25Owner reach178 followers of nickbabcock
25/25Track record131 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers178
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginnickbabcock
public_repos131
account_age_days5,095
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 7 days ago
20/20Version history18 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesrawzip
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish7

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

73Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests13 out of 13 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

80Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://crates.io/crates/rawzip
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttps://crates.io/crates/rawzip
docs_sitehttps://crates.io/crates/rawzip
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

58Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests13 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
5/5Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.8
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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.

46Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
0/8Automated maintenanceno data
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency 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_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
52.6/55Manageable file sizes2/45 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes74,588
source_files_sampled45
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
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

20GitHub stars
6contributors
205commits, last 12 months
7days since last push
18releases
1bus factor
3open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Could not fetch crates package 'rawzip-bench' from its registry
  • crates package 'compare' points at a different repository (https://github.com/contain-rs/compare); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • Could not fetch crates package 'rawzip-fuzz' from its registry
  • deps.dev does not index crates:rawzip@0.5.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.8 / 10
5.8aggregate

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 · 2026-07-20 16:40 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
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
10CI-Tests13 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/17 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
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 14
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iocriterion0.8.2bench/Cargo.toml
crates.iorawzipbench/Cargo.toml
crates.ioanyhow1.0.103compare/Cargo.toml
crates.ioasync_zip0.0.18compare/Cargo.toml
crates.iocriterion0.8compare/Cargo.toml
crates.iorawzipcompare/Cargo.toml
crates.iorc-zip5.4.1compare/Cargo.toml
crates.iorc-zip-sync4.4.2compare/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.52compare/Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio-util0.7.18compare/Cargo.toml
crates.iozip8.6compare/Cargo.toml
crates.ioflate21.0.35fuzz/Cargo.toml
crates.iolibfuzzer-sys0.4fuzz/Cargo.toml
crates.iorawzipfuzz/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 23

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 13 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioanyhowdirect
crates.ioasync_zipdirect
crates.iocriteriondirect
crates.ioflate2direct
crates.iolibfuzzer-sysdirect
crates.iorc-zipdirect
crates.iorc-zip-syncdirect
crates.iotokiodirect
crates.iotokio-utildirect
crates.iozipdirect
crates.ioaesindirect
crates.ioctrindirect
crates.iofiletimeindirect
crates.iogungraunindirect
crates.iohmacindirect
crates.iojiffindirect
crates.iopasteindirect
crates.iopbkdf2indirect
crates.ioquickcheckindirect
crates.ioquickcheck_macrosindirect
crates.iorstestindirect
crates.iosha1indirect
crates.iozstdindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 v0.16.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.