Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-14 08:18 UTC

oxidecomputer / oxnet

RustApache-2.0★ 6 stars⑂ 1 forksince May 2024View on GitHub ↗

oxidecomputer/oxnet holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (73/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (43/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

67
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.

67
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 61 is calibrated to 67 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

2,910 followers408 public repossince Aug 2019

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iooxnet0.1.726,42780 days agonetworkingnetwork-programmingweb-programming

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

73Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
6.2/36Commit cadence9/52 weeks with commits
11.5/18Commit volume18 commits in the last year
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
commits_last_year18
human_commit_share0.568
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year9
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases8 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 0 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~78.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count8
latest_release_tagoxnet-0.1.7
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases78.4
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?

43Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
11.3/60Stars6 stars
0/25Forks1 forks
6.8/15Watchers18 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars6
watchers18
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
59/80Monthly downloads26,427 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesoxnet
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads349,111
monthly_downloads26,427
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?

72Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.4/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 71% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth7 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.714
How it's scored
21/42Issue resolution50% of issues closed
19.5/30PR acceptance56/86 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 10/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs56
open_issues2
closed_issues2
prs_merged_7d3
prs_decided_7d3
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.5
closed_unmerged_prs30
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
24.9/25Owner reach2,910 followers of oxidecomputer
25/25Track record408 public repos, account ~7 yr old
Inputs used
followers2,910
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginoxidecomputer
public_repos408
account_age_days2,558
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 0 days ago
20/20Version history8 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesoxnet
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

46Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests24 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
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 sitehttps://docs.rs/oxnet
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/oxnet
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

70Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2/2.5CI-Tests24 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 10/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
5.2/7.5Maintained9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
5/5Packagingpackaging workflow detected
2/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
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
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.3
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 advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages71
unassessed_packages0
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 71 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

51Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
35.6/40Legible commit history28 of 42 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.667
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
2.7/10Demonstrated agent practice1 of the last 74 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance32 of the last 74 commits are automated dependency updates
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.014
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.432
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
45.8/55Manageable file sizes1/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes62,061
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files1

Key facts

6GitHub stars
7contributors
18commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
8releases
1bus factor
2open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index crates:oxnet@0.1.7; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.3 / 10
6.3aggregate

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 · 2026-08-14 08:18 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
8CI-Tests24 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 10/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
4Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
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 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioschemars0.8.22Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0.228Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0.145Cargo.toml
crates.ioipnetwork0.21.1Cargo.toml
crates.iomacaddr1.0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iosha10.11.0Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.9.2Cargo.toml
All dependencies 71

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 64 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioipnetwork0.21.1direct
crates.iomacaddr1.0.1direct
crates.iorand0.9.3direct
crates.ioschemars0.8.22direct
crates.ioserde1.0.229direct
crates.ioserde_json1.0.151direct
crates.iosha10.11.0direct
crates.ioallocator-api20.2.18indirect
crates.ioatomicwrites0.4.4indirect
crates.iobitflags2.9.0indirect
crates.ioblock-buffer0.12.1indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.0indirect
crates.ioconsole0.15.8indirect
crates.ioconst-oid0.10.2indirect
crates.iocpufeatures0.3.0indirect
crates.iocrypto-common0.2.2indirect
crates.iodigest0.11.3indirect
crates.iodyn-clone1.0.17indirect
crates.ioencode_unicode0.3.6indirect
crates.ioequivalent1.0.1indirect
crates.ioerrno0.3.11indirect
crates.ioexpectorate1.2.0indirect
crates.iofastrand2.3.0indirect
crates.iofoldhash0.2.0indirect
crates.iogetrandom0.3.3indirect
crates.iohashbrown0.16.1indirect
crates.iohybrid-array0.4.14indirect
crates.ioitoa1.0.11indirect
crates.iolazy_static1.4.0indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.169indirect
crates.iolinux-raw-sys0.4.15indirect
crates.iolinux-raw-sys0.9.4indirect
crates.iomemchr2.7.2indirect
crates.ionewline-converter0.3.0indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.3indirect
crates.ioppv-lite860.2.21indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.92indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.36indirect
crates.ior-efi5.2.0indirect
crates.iorand_chacha0.9.0indirect
crates.iorand_core0.9.3indirect
crates.ioregress0.11.1indirect
crates.iorustix0.38.44indirect
crates.iorustix1.0.7indirect
crates.ioschemars_derive0.8.22indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_derive_internals0.29.0indirect
crates.iosimilar2.5.0indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.89indirect
crates.iosyn3.0.3indirect
crates.iotempfile3.20.0indirect
crates.iotypenum1.20.1indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.12indirect
crates.iounicode-segmentation1.11.0indirect
crates.iounicode-width0.1.12indirect
crates.iowasi0.14.2+wasi-0.2.4indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.52.0indirect
crates.iowindows-targets0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_aarch64_gnullvm0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_aarch64_msvc0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_gnu0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_gnullvm0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_i686_msvc0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_gnu0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_gnullvm0.52.5indirect
crates.iowindows_x86_64_msvc0.52.5indirect
crates.iowit-bindgen-rt0.39.0indirect
crates.iozerocopy0.8.27indirect
crates.iozerocopy-derive0.8.27indirect
crates.iozmij1.0.23indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 71 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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