Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-23 00:24 UTC

paulmillr / noble-hashes

Audited & minimal JS implementation of hash functions, MACs and KDFs.

TypeScriptMIT★ 903 stars⑂ 69 forkssince Oct 2021View on GitHub ↗

paulmillr/noble-hashes holds a health index of 78 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (47/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

78
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.

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

Ownership

Paul MillerPersonal account
4,465 followers70 public repossince Jan 2011

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
npm@noble/hashes2.3.0297,090,3024516 days agosha1sha2sha3blakeblake2blake3hmachkdfpbkdf2scryptsha256sha512keccakripemd160kdfhashcryptographysecuritynoble

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 1 days ago
14.5/36Commit cadence21/52 weeks with commits
16.9/18Commit volume75 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained29 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year75
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year21
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases32 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 16 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~69 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count32
latest_release_tag2.3.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release16
mean_days_between_releases69

Community & Adoption

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

70Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
47.9/60Stars903 stars
15.3/25Forks69 forks
5/15Watchers9 watchers
Inputs used
forks69
stars903
watchers9
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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads297,090,302 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packages@noble/hashes
dependents
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads
monthly_downloads297,090,302
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?

63Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 93% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth18 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled18
top_contributor_share0.931
How it's scored
40.1/42Issue resolution96% of issues closed
17.9/30PR acceptance37/62 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs37
open_issues3
closed_issues63
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d3
issue_closed_ratio0.955
closed_unmerged_prs25
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
25/25Owner reach4,465 followers of paulmillr
25/25Track record70 public repos, account ~15 yr old
Inputs used
followers4,465
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginpaulmillr
public_repos70
account_age_days5,693
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 npm
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 16 days ago
20/20Version history45 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packages@noble/hashes
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish16

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://paulmillr.com/noble
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics19 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscryptography, hash, kdf, hashing, sha256, sha512, sha3, keccak, blake2, hmac, hkdf, pbkdf2, scrypt, crypto, blake3, kangarootwelve, argon2, ripemd160, sha1
has_wikino
homepagehttps://paulmillr.com/noble
docs_sitehttps://paulmillr.com/noble
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

65Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
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
7.5/7.5Maintained29 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
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_aggregate5.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Packaging. 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_packages60
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 60 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.

47Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
13.3/40Legible commit history25 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.25
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingtest/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configstest/tsconfig.json, tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeTypeScript (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/58 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageTypeScript
largest_source_bytes50,608
source_files_sampled58
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

903GitHub stars
18contributors
75commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
32releases
1bus 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 ★ / 69 ⇿
0Stars
69Forks
32Releases

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.

01325385063756942021-102024-032026-08
Major 2Minor 13Patch 17

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.6 / 10
5.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-23 00:24 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 19 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained29 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTno SAST tool detected
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 60

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 60 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@awasm/noble0.1.4indirect
npm@esbuild/aix-ppc640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/android-arm0.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/android-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/android-x640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/darwin-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/darwin-x640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/freebsd-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/freebsd-x640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-arm0.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-ia320.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-loong640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-mips64el0.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-ppc640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-riscv640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-s390x0.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/linux-x640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/netbsd-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/netbsd-x640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/openbsd-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/openbsd-x640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/openharmony-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/sunos-x640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/win32-arm640.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/win32-ia320.28.2indirect
npm@esbuild/win32-x640.28.2indirect
npm@node-rs/argon21.8.3indirect
npm@paulmillr/jsbt0.7.1indirect
npm@stablelib/blake2b1.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/blake2s1.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/hkdf1.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/hmac1.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/pbkdf21.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/scrypt1.0.2indirect
npm@stablelib/sha2561.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/sha31.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/sha3841.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/sha5121.0.1indirect
npm@stablelib/sha512_2561.0.1indirect
npm@types/node26.2.0indirect
npmbismar0.1.8indirect
npmblake-hash2.0.0indirect
npmblake3-bao1.3.4indirect
npmcreate-hash1.2.0indirect
npmcreate-hmac1.1.7indirect
npmesbuild0.28.2indirect
npmfast-check4.2.0indirect
npmfast-sha2561.3.0indirect
npmhash-wasm4.11.0indirect
npmjs-sha30.9.2indirect
npmlibsodium-wrappers0.7.13indirect
npmmicro-ftch1.2.0indirect
npmprettier3.9.6indirect
npmpure-rand7.0.1indirect
npmscrypt-async2.0.1indirect
npmscrypt-js3.0.1indirect
npmsha32.1.4indirect
npmtypescript6.0.3indirect
npmundici-types8.3.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 60 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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsnpm.