Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 04:14 UTC

opensanctions / yente

API for OpenSanctions with support for entity search and bulk matching of data collections. Supports Reconciliation API spec.

PythonMIT★ 176 stars⑂ 68 forkssince Jan 2022View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolNetwork serviceLibraryhow this is determined

opensanctions/yente holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (98/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (50/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

92
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.

92
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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

OpenSanctionsOrganization · verified domain
233 followers34 public repossince May 2021

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIyente5.5.03834680 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

98Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
33.2/36Commit cadence — 48/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 586 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year586
human_commit_share0.77
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year48

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 42 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 80 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~42.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count42
latest_release_tagv5.5.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release80
mean_days_between_releases42.6
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?

50Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
36.4/60Stars — 176 stars
15.2/25Forks — 68 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks68
stars176
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
34.5/80Monthly downloads — 383 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesyente
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads383
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
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
8.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 63% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 17 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled17
top_contributor_share0.633
How it's scored
29.3/42Issue resolution — 70% of issues closed
15.3/30PR acceptance — 573/1,124 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
3/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
merged_prs573
open_issues37
closed_issues85
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.697
closed_unmerged_prs551
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
17/25Owner reach — 233 followers of opensanctions
21.8/25Track record — 34 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers233
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginopensanctions
public_repos34
account_age_days1,929

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 80 days ago
20/20Version history — 46 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesyente
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish80

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

91Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 13 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://yente.followthemoney.tech/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsopensanctions, sanctions, kyc, aml, ofac, sanction-lists
has_wikino
homepagehttps://yente.followthemoney.tech/
docs_sitehttps://yente.followthemoney.tech/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

76Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 13 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1.5/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file 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
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, 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_packages26
unassessed_packages11
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 26 resolved dependencies against OSV. 11 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.

84Excellent · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://www.opensanctions.org/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 60 of 77 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://www.opensanctions.org/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.779
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes285
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile, contrib/validation_report/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — yente/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 30 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 23 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_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile, contrib/validation_report/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configsyente/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.3
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.23
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (yente/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/75 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes17,853
source_files_sampled75
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

176GitHub stars
17contributors
586commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
42releases
1bus factor
37open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 68 ⇿
0Stars
68Forks
42Releases

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.

01325385063756632022-032024-062026-09
Major 4Minor 19Patch 19

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.0 / 10
7.0aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 04:14 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
9CI-Tests13 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2Code-ReviewFound 1/5 approved changesets -- score normalized to 2
10Contributorsproject has 7 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 30
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIelasticsearch== 9.4.1pyproject.toml
PyPIopensearch-py== 3.2.0pyproject.toml
PyPIuvicorn== 0.52.4pyproject.toml
PyPIhttpx== 0.28.1pyproject.toml
PyPIaiohttp== 3.14.3pyproject.toml
PyPIboto3~= 1.37pyproject.toml
PyPIfastapi== 0.141.1pyproject.toml
PyPIpython-multipart== 0.0.32pyproject.toml
PyPIemail-validator== 2.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIstructlog== 26.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpyicu== 2.16.2pyproject.toml
PyPIpydantic—pyproject.toml
PyPIanyio== 4.15.1pyproject.toml
PyPIorjson== 3.12.0pyproject.toml
PyPItext-unidecode== 1.3pyproject.toml
PyPIclick>= 8.2,< 8.6pyproject.toml
PyPInormality== 3.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIcountrynames== 1.17.0pyproject.toml
PyPIcryptography== 50.0.1pyproject.toml
PyPIfollowthemoney== 4.11.0pyproject.toml
PyPIfingerprints== 1.3.1pyproject.toml
PyPInomenklatura== 4.15.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrigour== 2.5.0pyproject.toml
PyPIasyncstdlib== 3.14.0pyproject.toml
PyPIaiocron== 2.1pyproject.toml
PyPIaiocsv== 1.4.1pyproject.toml
PyPIaiofiles== 25.1.0pyproject.toml
PyPIrich—pyproject.toml
PyPIopentelemetry-distro—pyproject.toml
PyPIopentelemetry-instrumentation-fastapi>= 0.64b0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 37

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 27 direct and 10 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiocron2.1direct
PyPIaiocsv1.4.1direct
PyPIaiofiles25.1.0direct
PyPIaiohttp3.14.3direct
PyPIanyio4.15.1direct
PyPIasyncstdlib3.14.0direct
PyPIboto3—direct
PyPIclick—direct
PyPIcountrynames1.17.0direct
PyPIcryptography50.0.1direct
PyPIelasticsearch9.4.1direct
PyPIemail-validator2.3.0direct
PyPIfastapi0.141.1direct
PyPIfingerprints1.3.1direct
PyPIfollowthemoney4.11.0direct
PyPIhttpx0.28.1direct
PyPInomenklatura4.15.0direct
PyPInormality3.1.0direct
PyPIopensearch-py3.2.0direct
PyPIopentelemetry-instrumentation-fastapi—direct
PyPIorjson3.12.0direct
PyPIpyicu2.16.2direct
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.32direct
PyPIrigour2.5.0direct
PyPIstructlog26.1.0direct
PyPItext-unidecode1.3direct
PyPIuvicorn0.52.4direct
PyPIboto3-stubs—indirect
PyPIbump2version1.0.1indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPIpip—indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpytest-httpx—indirect
PyPItypes-aiofiles—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 26 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 11 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 — PyPI.