Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-11 20:37 UTC

panther-labs / panther-analysis

Built-in Panther detection rules and policies

PythonApache-2.0★ 464 stars⑂ 206 forkssince Oct 2019View on GitHub ↗
#security#python#cybersecurity#siem

panther-labs/panther-analysis holds a health index of 98 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (97/100) and lowest on Security (74/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 7 contributors account for most of its recent work.

98
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

98
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 86 is calibrated to 98 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Panther LabsOrganization · verified domain
113 followers25 public repossince Aug 2018

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

97Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

96Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
31.8/36Commit cadence — 46/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 377 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year377
human_commit_share0.83
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year46

Release discipline

98Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 15 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~15 days
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv3.114.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release15
mean_days_between_releases15

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

81Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

71Good
How it's scored
43.2/60Stars — 464 stars
19.3/25Forks — 206 forks
8.3/15Watchers — 32 watchers
Inputs used
forks206
stars464
watchers32
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR 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_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

92Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

93Exceptional
How it's scored
51.3/54Bus factor — 7 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 19% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 99 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 14 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor7
contributors_sampled99
top_contributor_share0.188

Issue & PR responsiveness

95Exceptional
How it's scored
41.2/42Issue resolution — 98% of issues closed
26.2/30PR acceptance — 1,799/2,059 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs1,799
open_issues2
closed_issues96
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d3
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio0.98
closed_unmerged_prs260
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.

Ownership & stewardship

87Excellent
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
14.8/25Owner reach — 113 followers of panther-labs
22.3/25Track record — 25 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers113
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginpanther-labs
public_repos25
account_age_days2,961

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

82Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 14 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .pylintrc, pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

65Good
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://panther.com/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 4 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicssecurity, python, cybersecurity, siem
has_wikino
homepagehttps://panther.com/
docs_sitehttps://panther.com/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

74Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

67Good
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 26 out of 26 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
7.5/7.5Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 14 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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
2/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
4.5/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
2/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
6/7.5Signed-Releases — 5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 26 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate6.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. 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
advisories52
affected_packages3
assessed_packages129
unassessed_packages1
affected_by_severitycritical 1, moderate 1, low 1
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 129 resolved dependencies against OSV. 1 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.

76Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.panther.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 63 of 83 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.panther.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.759
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes30,842

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

83Excellent
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .pylintrc, pyproject.toml ([tool.black], [tool.isort])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 10 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 17 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
4/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesPipfile.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.1
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.17

Code legibility for models

55Moderate
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 1/1,127 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes121,530
source_files_sampled1,127
oversized_source_files1

Machine-readable interfaces

33At Risk
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

464GitHub stars
99contributors
377commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
100releases
7bus factor
2open 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 ★ / 206 ⇿
0Stars
206Forks
100Releases

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.

0408012016020024020332020-022023-052026-09
Major 0Minor 88Patch 12

Each point covers 6 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.7 / 10
6.7aggregate

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 · 2026-09-11 20:36 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
10CI-Tests26 out of 26 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 14 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 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
4Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 4
9SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 9
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
8Signed-Releases5 out of the last 5 releases have a total of 5 signed artifacts.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities26 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 130

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 130 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaiohappyeyeballs2.6.2indirect
PyPIaiohttp3.13.3indirect
PyPIaiosignal1.4.0indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.12.1indirect
PyPIappdirs1.4.4indirect
PyPIastroid3.3.11indirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs25.4.0indirect
PyPIbackoff2.2.1indirect
PyPIbandit1.9.4indirect
PyPIblack26.3.1indirect
PyPIboto31.42.97indirect
PyPIbotocore1.42.97indirect
PyPIcertifi2025.11.12indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.0indirect
PyPIcfgv3.5.0indirect
PyPIchardet5.2.0indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.4.9indirect
PyPIclick8.3.3indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcontextlib221.6.0indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.0indirect
PyPIdatadog0.53.0indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdiff-cover10.0.0indirect
PyPIdill0.4.1indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdynaconf3.2.13indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.2indirect
PyPIfrozenlist1.8.0indirect
PyPIgql4.0.0indirect
PyPIgraphql-core3.2.11indirect
PyPIidentify2.6.19indirect
PyPIidna3.18indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIisort5.13.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjmespath1.0.1indirect
PyPIjsonlines4.0.0indirect
PyPIjsonpath-ng1.5.3indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.25.1indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIlibrt0.13.0indirect
PyPIlinkify-it-py2.1.0indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImccabe0.7.0indirect
PyPImdit-py-plugins0.6.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImoto5.2.2indirect
PyPImultidict6.7.1indirect
PyPImypy1.20.2indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInested-lookup0.2.25indirect
PyPInodeenv1.10.0indirect
PyPIpackaging25.0indirect
PyPIpanther-analysis-tool1.8.0indirect
PyPIpanther-core0.16.2indirect
PyPIpanther-detection-helpers0.4.0indirect
PyPIpathspec1.0.4indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIply3.11indirect
PyPIpolicyuniverse1.5.1.20230817indirect
PyPIpre-commit4.6.1indirect
PyPIpropcache0.4.1indirect
PyPIpycountry24.6.1indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.12.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.41.5indirect
PyPIpygments2.19.2indirect
PyPIpylint3.3.9indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.5.1indirect
PyPIpytokens0.4.1indirect
PyPIpyyaml—indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIregex2025.11.3indirect
PyPIrequests2.33.1indirect
PyPIresponses0.26.2indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml0.18.17indirect
PyPIruamel-yaml-clib0.2.15indirect
PyPIs3transfer0.16.1indirect
PyPIschema0.7.8indirect
PyPIsemver3.0.4indirect
PyPIsetuptools80.9.0indirect
PyPIshellingham1.5.4indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsniffio1.3.1indirect
PyPIsqlfluff4.2.2indirect
PyPIstevedore5.9.0indirect
PyPItblib3.2.2indirect
PyPItextual6.3.0indirect
PyPItoml0.10.2indirect
PyPItomli2.3.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItqdm4.67.3indirect
PyPItree-sitter0.26.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-bash0.25.1indirect
PyPItree-sitter-css0.25.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-go0.25.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-html0.23.2indirect
PyPItree-sitter-java0.23.5indirect
PyPItree-sitter-javascript0.25.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-json0.24.8indirect
PyPItree-sitter-markdown0.5.1indirect
PyPItree-sitter-python0.25.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-regex0.25.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-rust0.23.2indirect
PyPItree-sitter-sql0.3.7indirect
PyPItree-sitter-toml0.7.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-xml0.7.0indirect
PyPItree-sitter-yaml0.7.2indirect
PyPItyper0.20.1indirect
PyPItyper-config1.4.3indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.2indirect
PyPIuc-micro-py2.0.0indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.1indirect
PyPIwerkzeug3.1.8indirect
PyPIwrapt2.0.1indirect
PyPIxmltodict1.0.4indirect
PyPIyarl1.22.0indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 129 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 1 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
aiohttp3.13.3indirectcritical483.14.3
setuptools80.9.0indirectmoderate283.0.0
pygments2.19.2indirectlow22.20.0

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with panther-labs/panther-analysis. Read them side by side →

99prowler-cloud/prowlerProwler is the world’s most widely used open-source cloud security platform that automates security and compliance across any cloud environment.Exceptional99DataDog/dd-trace-pyDatadog Python APM ClientExceptional99OpenCTI-Platform/openctiOpen Cyber Threat Intelligence PlatformExceptional99IBM/mcp-context-forgeAn AI Gateway, registry, and proxy that sits in front of any MCP, A2A, or REST/gRPC APIs, exposing a unified endpoint with centralized discovery, guardrails and management. Optimizes Agent & Tool calling, and supports plugins.Exceptional98theupdateframework/python-tufPython reference implementation of The Update Framework (TUF)Exceptional98intuitem/ciso-assistant-communityCISO Assistant is a one-stop-shop GRC platform for Risk Management, AppSec, Compliance & Audit, TPRM, BIA, Privacy, and Reporting. It supports 200+ global frameworks with automatic control mapping, including ISO 27001, NIST CSF, SOC 2, CIS, PCI DSS, NIS2, DORA, GDPR, HIPAA, CMMC, and more.Exceptional

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.