Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 06:15 UTC

platformsh / platformsh-oauth2-php

[needs update] PHP OAuth2 client library for Platform.sh

PHPMIT★ 2 stars⑂ 1 forksince Nov 2017View on GitHub ↗

platformsh/platformsh-oauth2-php holds a health index of 28 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (58/100) and lowest on Vitality (15/100). It was last updated 229 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

28
overall / 100
At Risk

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.

28
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 38 is calibrated to 33 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Platform.shOrganization · verified domain
126 followers162 public repossince Apr 2014

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Packagistplatformsh/oauth21.0.0-beta37,2526657 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

15Critical · 21% of overall
How it's scored
3.6/36Push recency — last push 229 days ago
0/36Commit cadence — 0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume — 0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 0 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_push229
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 6 version tags (no GitHub releases)
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 657 days ago
5.4/27Release cadence — a release every ~513.9 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count6
latest_release_tag1.0.0-beta3
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release657
mean_days_between_releases513.9
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?

31At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 2 stars
0/25Forks — 1 forks
0/15Watchers — 1 watchers
Inputs used
forks1
stars2
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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
51.5/80Monthly downloads — 7,252 downloads/month across packagist
2/20Registry dependents — 1 packages depend on it
Inputs used
packagesplatformsh/oauth2
dependents1
ecosystemspackagist
total_downloads275,061
monthly_downloads7,252
unverified_packages_excluded—

Sustainability & Governance

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

49Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
8.6/30PR acceptance — 2/7 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs2
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs5
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
15.1/25Owner reach — 126 followers of platformsh
25/25Track record — 162 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers126
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginplatformsh
public_repos162
account_age_days4,539
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on packagist
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 657 days ago
20/20Version history — 6 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesplatformsh/oauth2
ecosystemspackagist
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish657

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

58Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://platform.sh
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 3 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsphp, oauth2, platformsh
has_wikino
homepagehttps://platform.sh
docs_sitehttps://platform.sh
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

41Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — no data
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — 0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 14 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate2.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. 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
advisories14
affected_packages3
assessed_packages37
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2, moderate 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 37 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.

26At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
4/40Legible commit history — 3 of 40 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.075
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 40
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilescomposer.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — PHP without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/6 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePHP
largest_source_bytes8,174
source_files_sampled6
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

2GitHub stars
1contributors
0commits, last 12 months
229days since last push
6releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Packagistpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.6 / 10
2.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 06:15 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 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/28 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
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
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities14 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Packagistleague/oauth2-client^2.2composer.json
All dependencies 37

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 36 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Packagistleague/oauth2-client2.7.0direct
Packagistguzzlehttp/guzzle7.9.2indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/promises2.0.4indirect
Packagistguzzlehttp/psr72.7.0indirect
Packagistmyclabs/deep-copy1.12.1indirect
Packagistnikic/php-parser5.3.1indirect
Packagistparagonie/random_compat9.99.100indirect
Packagistphar-io/manifest2.0.4indirect
Packagistphar-io/version3.2.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-code-coverage11.0.7indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-file-iterator5.1.0indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-invoker5.0.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-text-template4.0.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/php-timer7.0.1indirect
Packagistphpunit/phpunit11.4.3indirect
Packagistpsr/http-client1.0.3indirect
Packagistpsr/http-factory1.1.0indirect
Packagistpsr/http-message2.0indirect
Packagistralouphie/getallheaders3.0.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/cli-parser3.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit3.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/code-unit-reverse-lookup4.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/comparator6.2.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/complexity4.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/diff6.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/environment7.2.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/exporter6.1.3indirect
Packagistsebastian/global-state7.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/lines-of-code3.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-enumerator6.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/object-reflector4.0.1indirect
Packagistsebastian/recursion-context6.0.2indirect
Packagistsebastian/type5.1.0indirect
Packagistsebastian/version5.0.2indirect
Packagistsymfony/deprecation-contracts3.5.0indirect
Packagistsymplify/easy-coding-standard12.3.6indirect
Packagisttheseer/tokenizer1.2.3indirect
Dependency advisories 3

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 37 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 3 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
guzzlehttp/guzzle7.9.2indirecthigh98.0.1
phpunit/phpunit11.4.3indirecthigh112.5.8
guzzlehttp/psr72.7.0indirectmoderate42.12.3

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 — Packagist.