Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-19 01:36 UTC

pkimetal / pkimetal

PKI Meta-Linter

GoGPL-3.0★ 131 stars⑂ 21 forkssince Nov 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryApplicationhow this is determined

pkimetal/pkimetal holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (100/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (60/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

91
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.

91
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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

pkimetalOrganization
13 followers1 public reposince Mar 2024

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/pkimetal/pkimetalv1.53.0-685 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

100Exceptional · 21% of overall

Development activity

100Exceptional
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
36/36Commit cadence — 52/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 2,018 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year2,018
human_commit_share0.38
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year52

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 68 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 5 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~17.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count68
latest_release_tagv1.53.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release5
mean_days_between_releases17.2
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?

67Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
34.3/60Stars — 131 stars
10.8/25Forks — 21 forks
6.4/15Watchers — 15 watchers
Inputs used
forks21
stars131
watchers15
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (GPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesapi.securityscorecards.dev, github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

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 factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.4/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 58% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 10 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 10 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled10
top_contributor_share0.582
How it's scored
37/42Issue resolution — 88% of issues closed
29.8/30PR acceptance — 2,022/2,036 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs2,022
open_issues2
closed_issues15
prs_merged_7d2
prs_decided_7d2
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.882
closed_unmerged_prs14
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
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
8.2/25Owner reach — 13 followers of pkimetal
7.4/25Track record — 1 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginpkimetal
public_repos1
account_age_days948

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 5 days ago
20/20Version history — 68 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesgithub.com/pkimetal/pkimetal
ecosystemsgo
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish5

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://pkimet.al/
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://pkimet.al/
docs_sitehttps://pkimet.al/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

83Excellent · 16% of overall

Security posture

83Excellent
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 — 20 out of 20 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
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 10 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 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities — 1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate8.2
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: golang.org/x/crypto v0.58.0 (unknown)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
37.2/40No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 103 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages60
unassessed_packages18
affected_by_severityunknown 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 60 resolved dependencies against OSV. 18 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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.keyfactor.com/llms.txt)
4.2/40Legible commit history — 3 of 38 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.keyfactor.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.079
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 10 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsgo.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.1
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/51 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes27,054
source_files_sampled51
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
40/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — doc/openapi.yaml
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_filesdoc/openapi.yaml
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

131GitHub stars
10contributors
2,018commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
68releases
1bus factor
2open issues
Go, 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 ★ / 21 ⇿
0Stars
21Forks
65Releases

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.

0481216202022024-062025-082026-10
Major 1Minor 52Patch 12

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 8.2 / 10
8.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-19 01:36 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-Tests20 out of 20 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/13 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 10 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 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 17
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/CVE-2008-0166/dwklint/v2v2.1.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/crtsh/ccadb_datav1.20261015.90110go.mod
Gogithub.com/crtsh/ctlintv0.0.0-20261013151429-369be866c00bgo.mod
Gogithub.com/crtsh/ctloglistsv1.20261013.190400go.mod
Gogithub.com/goccy/go-jsonv0.11.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/certificate-transparency-gov1.3.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_golangv1.25.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/sergi/go-diffv1.4.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/viperv1.21.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/titanous/rocacheckv0.0.0-20171023193734-afe73141d399go.mod
Gogithub.com/valyala/fasthttpv1.75.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/zmap/zcryptov0.0.0-20261015235857-7cf9a461cf78go.mod
Gogithub.com/zmap/zlint/v3v3.7.2go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/automaxprocsv1.6.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/zapv1.28.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.58.0go.mod
npm@redocly/cli2.62.1package.json
All dependencies 78

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 17 direct and 61 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Gogithub.com/crtsh/ccadb_datav1.20261015.90110direct
Gogithub.com/crtsh/ctlintv0.0.0-20261013151429-369be866c00bdirect
Gogithub.com/crtsh/ctloglistsv1.20261013.190400direct
Gogithub.com/cve-2008-0166/dwklint/v2v2.1.0direct
Gogithub.com/goccy/go-jsonv0.11.2direct
Gogithub.com/google/certificate-transparency-gov1.3.3direct
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_golangv1.25.0direct
Gogithub.com/sergi/go-diffv1.4.0direct
Gogithub.com/spf13/viperv1.21.0direct
Gogithub.com/titanous/rocacheckv0.0.0-20171023193734-afe73141d399direct
Gogithub.com/valyala/fasthttpv1.75.0direct
Gogithub.com/zmap/zcryptov0.0.0-20261015235857-7cf9a461cf78direct
Gogithub.com/zmap/zlint/v3v3.7.2direct
Gogo.uber.org/automaxprocsv1.6.0direct
Gogo.uber.org/zapv1.28.0direct
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.58.0direct
npm@redocly/cli2.62.1direct
Gogithub.com/badkeys/badkeysv0.0.21indirect
Gogithub.com/beorn7/perksv1.0.1indirect
Gogithub.com/certlint/certlintv1.8.6indirect
Gogithub.com/cespare/xxhash/v2v2.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/cve-2008-0166/dwk_blocklists_sqlite3v0.0.0-20250725083057-d37481c06d85indirect
Gogithub.com/digicert/pkilintv0.13.3indirect
Gogithub.com/dustin/go-humanizev1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/fsnotify/fsnotifyv1.10.1indirect
Gogithub.com/go-logr/logrv1.4.4indirect
Gogithub.com/go-viper/mapstructure/v2v2.5.0indirect
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compressv1.20.3indirect
Gogithub.com/kroeckx/x509lintv0.0.0-20260109123110-103c92f2f1adindirect
Gogithub.com/mattn/go-isattyv0.0.24indirect
Gogithub.com/molecule-man/go-brrrv1.3.0indirect
Gogithub.com/munnerz/goautonegv0.0.0-20191010083416-a7dc8b61c822indirect
Gogithub.com/ncruces/go-strftimev1.1.0indirect
Gogithub.com/pelletier/go-tomlv1.9.5indirect
Gogithub.com/pelletier/go-toml/v2v2.4.3indirect
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_modelv0.6.3indirect
Gogithub.com/prometheus/commonv0.72.1indirect
Gogithub.com/prometheus/procfsv0.22.0indirect
Gogithub.com/remyoudompheng/bigfftv0.0.0-20230129092748-24d4a6f8daecindirect
Gogithub.com/rspeer/python-ftfyv6.3.1+incompatibleindirect
Gogithub.com/sagikazarmark/locaferov0.12.0indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/aferov1.15.0indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/castv1.10.0indirect
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10indirect
Gogithub.com/subosito/gotenvv1.6.0indirect
Gogithub.com/valyala/bytebufferpoolv1.0.0indirect
Gogithub.com/weppos/publicsuffix-gov0.50.4-0.20261008072451-fc2bc5756b8dindirect
Gogo.uber.org/multierrv1.11.0indirect
Gogo.yaml.in/yaml/v3v3.0.5indirect
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.61.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.49.0indirect
Gogolang.org/x/textv0.43.0indirect
Gogoogle.golang.org/protobufv1.36.12indirect
Gok8s.io/klog/v2v2.140.0indirect
Gomodernc.org/libcv1.79.0indirect
Gomodernc.org/mathutilv1.7.1indirect
Gomodernc.org/memoryv1.12.1indirect
Gomodernc.org/sqlitev1.60.1indirect
Gozombiezen.com/go/sqlitev1.4.2indirect
PyPIblack—indirect
PyPIcryptography—indirect
PyPIflake8—indirect
PyPIfuro—indirect
PyPIgmpy2—indirect
PyPIiso3166—indirect
PyPIiso4217—indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPIpublicsuffixlist—indirect
PyPIpyasn1—indirect
PyPIpyasn1-alt-modules—indirect
PyPIpyasn1-fasder—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil—indirect
PyPIpython-iso639—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIvalidators—indirect
PyPIwcwidth—indirect
Dependency advisories 1

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: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 18 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
golang.org/x/cryptov0.58.0directunknown1—

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 — Go.