Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-19 14:53 UTC

pavel-one / EdgeGPT-Go

EdgeGPT-Go: Reverse engineered API of Microsoft's Bing Chat AI for Golang with GRPC, CLI, Library interface and cookie manager

GoMIT★ 151 stars⑂ 21 forkssince Mar 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolNetwork servicehow this is determined

pavel-one/EdgeGPT-Go holds a health index of 6 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (53/100) and lowest on Security (12/100). It was last updated 1236 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

6
overall / 100
Critical

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.

6
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 37 is calibrated to 31 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02). High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 20% multiplier to weighted overall health and gives it an At Risk ceiling of 34.

Ownership

Pavel ZarubinPersonal account
27 followers43 public repossince Sep 2017

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 publish
Gogithub.com/pavel-one/EdgeGPT-Gov1.3.3-111236 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

22At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
0/36Push recencylast push 1,236 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push1,236
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases8 releases published
0/36Release recencylatest release 1,236 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~4.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count8
latest_release_tagv1.3.3
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,236
mean_days_between_releases4.1

Community & Adoption

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

49Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
35.3/60Stars151 stars
10.8/25Forks21 forks
2.7/15Watchers4 watchers
Inputs used
forks21
stars151
watchers4
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_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicespkg.go.dev, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

53Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
7.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 67% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.674
How it's scored
36/42Issue resolution86% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance7/7 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs7
open_issues1
closed_issues6
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.857
closed_unmerged_prs0
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.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
10.4/25Owner reach27 followers of pavel-one
24/25Track record43 public repos, account ~9 yr old
Inputs used
followers27
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginpavel-one
public_repos43
account_age_days3,304
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on go
4/35Publish recencylatest publish 1,236 days ago
20/20Version history11 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/pavel-one/EdgeGPT-Go
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,236

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

44Weak · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics9 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbing, bing-ai, edge, edgegpt, golang, golang-library, gpt-4, reverse-engineering, microservice
has_wikino
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

12Critical · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
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
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities43 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate2.2
high_risk_jurisdiction_cap34
high_risk_jurisdiction_multiplier20
security_posture_after_multiplier4
security_posture_before_jurisdiction22
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized. High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy applies a 20% multiplier and gives Security posture an At risk ceiling of 34.
How it's scored
6.2/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories4 affected: google.golang.org/grpc 1.54.0 (critical 9.1), github.com/gomarkdown/markdown 0.0.0-20230322041520-c84983bdbf2a (high 7.5), google.golang.org/protobuf 1.30.0 (high 7.5), +1 more
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
25/40No advisories left outstanding3 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,092 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories65
affected_packages9
assessed_packages32
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 4, moderate 1, low 1, unknown 2
direct_affected_packages4
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 32 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.

37Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
7.4/40Legible commit history12 of 87 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.138
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapgo.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 87
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/20 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes9,209
source_files_sampled20
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)proto/gpt.proto
0/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesproto/gpt.proto
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

151GitHub stars
2contributors
0commits, last 12 months
1,236days since last push
8releases
1bus factor
1open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 21 ⇿
0Stars
21Forks
3Releases

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.

0481216202072023-042024-012024-11
Major 0Minor 1Patch 2

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.2 / 10
2.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-19 14:53 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
0CI-Tests0 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities43 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/MichaelMure/go-term-markdownv0.1.4go.mod
Gogithub.com/gabriel-vasile/mimetypev1.4.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/gomarkdown/markdownv0.0.0-20230322041520-c84983bdbf2ago.mod
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.3.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/gorilla/websocketv1.5.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.7.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/zapv1.24.0go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.54.0go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.30.0go.mod
Gogopkg.in/guregu/null.v4v4.0.0go.mod
All dependencies 32

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 10 direct and 22 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/gabriel-vasile/mimetype1.4.2direct
Gogithub.com/gomarkdown/markdown0.0.0-20230322041520-c84983bdbf2adirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuid1.3.0direct
Gogithub.com/gorilla/websocket1.5.0direct
Gogithub.com/michaelmure/go-term-markdown0.1.4direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobra1.7.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/zap1.24.0direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpc1.54.0direct
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobuf1.30.0direct
Gogopkg.in/guregu/null.v44.0.0direct
Gogithub.com/alecthomas/chroma0.10.0indirect
Gogithub.com/disintegration/imaging1.6.2indirect
Gogithub.com/dlclark/regexp21.9.0indirect
Gogithub.com/eliukblau/pixterm/pkg/ansimage0.0.0-20191210081756-9fb6cf8c2f75indirect
Gogithub.com/fatih/color1.15.0indirect
Gogithub.com/golang/protobuf1.5.3indirect
Gogithub.com/inconshreveable/mousetrap1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/kyokomi/emoji/v22.2.12indirect
Gogithub.com/lucasb-eyer/go-colorful1.2.0indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-colorable0.1.13indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isatty0.0.18indirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-runewidth0.0.14indirect
Gogithub.com/michaelmure/go-term-text0.3.1indirect
Gogithub.com/rivo/uniseg0.4.4indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflag1.0.5indirect
Gogo.uber.org/atomic1.10.0indirect
Gogo.uber.org/multierr1.11.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/image0.7.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/net0.9.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sys0.7.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/text0.9.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/genproto0.0.0-20230410155749-daa745c078e1indirect
Dependency advisories 9

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 32 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 9 carry known advisories, of which 4 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
google.golang.org/grpc1.54.0directcritical121.85.0-dev.0.20260825072537-93e31b48545e
github.com/gomarkdown/markdown0.0.0-20230322041520-c84983bdbf2adirecthigh60.0.0-20260411013819-759bbc3e3207
google.golang.org/protobuf1.30.0directhigh21.33.0
golang.org/x/image0.7.0indirecthigh170.45.0
golang.org/x/net0.9.0indirecthigh2312.0.2
github.com/gorilla/websocket1.5.0directmoderate21.5.3
github.com/disintegration/imaging1.6.2indirectlow1
golang.org/x/sys0.7.0indirectunknown10.44.0
golang.org/x/text0.9.0indirectunknown10.39.0

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.

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 statisticsGo.