Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-17 21:19 UTC

pubkey / broadcast-channel

:satellite: BroadcastChannel to send data between different browser-tabs or nodejs-processes :satellite: + LeaderElection over the channels https://pubkey.github.io/broadcast-channel/

JavaScriptMIT★ 2,001 stars⑂ 131 forkssince Jun 2018View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryDesktop applicationhow this is determined

pubkey/broadcast-channel holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (85/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (29/100). It was last updated 3 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

84
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.

84
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 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Daniel MeyerPersonal account
961 followers59 public repossince Sep 2014

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

71Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 3 days ago
14.5/36Commit cadence — 21/52 weeks with commits
16.6/18Commit volume — 70 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year70
human_commit_share0.12
days_since_last_push3
active_weeks_last_year21
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 18 releases published
16.2/36Release recency — latest release 240 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~160.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count18
latest_release_tag7.3.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release240
mean_days_between_releases160.8
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?

79Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
53.5/60Stars — 2,001 stars
17.6/25Forks — 131 forks
7.2/15Watchers — 21 watchers
Inputs used
forks131
stars2,001
watchers21
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
7.2/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateyes
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
80/80Monthly downloads — 11,560,931 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesbroadcast-channel
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads11,560,931
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?

66Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 60% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 27 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled27
top_contributor_share0.6
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
27.7/30PR acceptance — 1,226/1,330 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1,226
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs104
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
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
21.4/25Owner reach — 961 followers of pubkey
24.9/25Track record — 59 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers961
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginpubkey
public_repos59
account_age_days4,374
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 45 days ago
20/20Version history — 102 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesbroadcast-channel
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish45

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

85Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — .eslintrc, .eslintrc.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://pubkey.github.io/broadcast-channel/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 20 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscrosstab, broadcast-channel, broadcast, polyfill, indexeddb, localstorage, ipc, postmessage, communication-channel, leader-election, messaging, offline, shim, stream, channels, cookie, localforage, broker, client-side, shared
has_wikino
homepagehttps://pubkey.github.io/broadcast-channel/
docs_sitehttps://pubkey.github.io/broadcast-channel/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests — 28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 1/19 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
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 — 20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): 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
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages7
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:broadcast-channel@7.4.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 packages. 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.

29At Risk · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — .eslintrc, .eslintrc.json
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 88 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.88
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
50/55Manageable file sizes — 5/55 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes917,153
source_files_sampled55
oversized_source_files5

Key facts

2,001GitHub stars
27contributors
70commits, last 12 months
3days since last push
18releases
1bus factor
0open 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 ★ / 131 ⇿
0Stars
131Forks
18Releases

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.

025507510012515013042018-072022-072026-07
Major 1Minor 13Patch 4

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10
5.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-17 21:19 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
9CI-Tests28 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/19 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained20 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
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
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 11
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npm@babel/runtime7.29.7package.json
npmoblivious-set2.0.0package.json
npmp-queue6.6.2package.json
npmunload2.4.1package.json
npmbabel-polyfill6.26.0test-electron/package.json
npmbabel-runtime6.26.0test-electron/package.json
npmbroadcast-channel../test-electron/package.json
npmelectron8.5.5test-electron/package.json
npmelectron-tabs0.15.0test-electron/package.json
npmelectron-window-manager1.0.6test-electron/package.json
npmmelanke-watchjs1.5.2test-electron/package.json
All dependencies 65

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 54 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@babel/runtime7.29.7direct
npmbabel-polyfill6.26.0direct
npmbabel-runtime6.26.0direct
npmbroadcast-channel../direct
npmelectron8.5.5direct
npmelectron-tabs0.15.0direct
npmelectron-window-manager1.0.6direct
npmmelanke-watchjs1.5.2direct
npmoblivious-set2.0.0direct
npmp-queue6.6.2direct
npmunload2.4.1direct
npm@babel/cli7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/core7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/plugin-proposal-object-rest-spread7.20.7indirect
npm@babel/plugin-transform-member-expression-literals7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/plugin-transform-property-literals7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/plugin-transform-runtime7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/polyfill7.12.1indirect
npm@babel/preset-env7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/types7.29.8indirect
npm@rollup/plugin-terser1.0.0indirect
npm@types/core-js2.5.8indirect
npmassert2.1.0indirect
npmasync-test-util2.5.0indirect
npmbrowserify17.0.1indirect
npmchild-process-promise2.2.1indirect
npmclone2.1.2indirect
npmconcurrently9.2.4indirect
npmconvert-hrtime5.0.0indirect
npmcopyfiles2.4.1indirect
npmcross-env7.0.3indirect
npmdetect-node2.1.0indirect
npmeslint8.57.1indirect
npmgzip-size-cli5.1.0indirect
npmhttp-server14.1.1indirect
npmjest30.4.2indirect
npmkarma6.4.4indirect
npmkarma-babel-preprocessor8.0.2indirect
npmkarma-browserify8.1.0indirect
npmkarma-chrome-launcher3.2.0indirect
npmkarma-coverage2.2.1indirect
npmkarma-detect-browsers2.3.3indirect
npmkarma-edge-launcher0.4.2indirect
npmkarma-env-preprocessor0.1.1indirect
npmkarma-firefox-launcher2.1.3indirect
npmkarma-ie-launcher1.0.0indirect
npmkarma-mocha2.0.1indirect
npmkarma-opera-launcher1.0.0indirect
npmkarma-safari-launcher1.0.0indirect
npmmocha11.8.0indirect
npmmocha8.2.1indirect
npmnode13.14.0indirect
npmpre-commit1.2.2indirect
npmrandom-int3.1.0indirect
npmrandom-token0.0.8indirect
npmrimraf6.1.3indirect
npmrollup4.62.4indirect
npmspectron10.0.1indirect
npmtestcafe3.7.6indirect
npmts-node10.9.2indirect
npmtypescript5.4.5indirect
npmuglify-js3.19.3indirect
npmwatchify4.0.0indirect
npmwebpack5.91.0indirect
npmwebpack-cli7.2.2indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:broadcast-channel@7.4.0 pulls in 7 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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 statistics — npm.