# redf0x1/camofox-browser — health index 69/100 (Good)

> Inspection of the public repository redf0x1/camofox-browser by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/redf0x1/camofox-browser
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/redf0x1/camofox-browser
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/redf0x1/camofox-browser/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/r/redf0x1/camofox-browser.svg
- Inspected: 2026-09-18
- Methodology: metrics 2.10.0, report schema 0.34.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 21% | 68/100 | Good |
| Community & Adoption | 17% | 61/100 | Moderate |
| Sustainability & Governance | 23% | 56/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 19% | 75/100 | Good |
| Security | 16% | 47/100 | Weak |
| AI Readiness | 4% | 70/100 | Good |

The weighted overall 62 is calibrated to 69 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | Anti-detection browser server for AI agents — REST API wrapping Camoufox engine with OpenClaw plugin support |
| Classification | cli, library, network-service |
| Primary language | JavaScript |
| License | MIT |
| Stars | 394 |
| Forks | 59 |
| Created | 2026-02-15 |
| Last push | 2026-08-13 |
| Latest release | v2.4.7 |
| Commits (last year) | 235 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Topics | ai-agent, anti-detection, automation, bot-detection, browser-automation, browser-server, camofox, camoufox, docker, express, fingerprint, firefox, headless-browser, mcp, openclaw, playwright, rest-api, stealth-browser, typescript, web-scraping |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | camofox-browser | 2.4.7 | 1,972 |

## Vitality — 68/100 (Good)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 21% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 54/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | partial | 18 / 36 | last push 36 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 7.6 / 36 | 11/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 235 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | met | 10 / 10 | 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |

### Release discipline — 90/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 27 releases published |
| Release recency | met | 36 / 36 | latest release 36 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~17.6 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 10 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | last human commit 36 days ago |

## Community & Adoption — 61/100 (Moderate)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 17% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 57/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 42.1 / 60 | 394 stars |
| Forks | partial | 14.7 / 25 | 59 forks |
| Watchers | not met | 0 / 15 | 2 watchers |

### Community health — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (MIT) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 55/100 (Moderate)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 43.9 / 80 | 1,972 downloads/month across npm |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 56/100 (Moderate)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 23% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 16/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 2.4 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 89% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | partial | 4.1 / 13.5 | 3 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | not met | 0 / 10 | project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0 |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 76/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | met | 42 / 42 | 100% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 20 / 30 | 6/9 decided PRs merged |
| Newcomer PR acceptance | excluded | 0 / 13 | no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | partial | 4.5 / 15 | Found 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3 |

### Ownership & stewardship — 49/100 (Weak)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | partial | 10 / 30 | personal (user) account |
| Verified domain | excluded | 0 / 20 | not applicable to user accounts |
| Owner reach | partial | 11.4 / 25 | 37 followers of redf0x1 |
| Track record | partial | 17.8 / 25 | 12 public repos, account ~4 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 1 package(s) on npm |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 36 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 35 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 75/100 (Good)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 19% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 68/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 2 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | not met | 0 / 16 | — |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | met | 20 / 20 | 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |

### Documentation — 85/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 20 topics |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 47/100 (Weak)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 38/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | not met | 0 / 7.5 | branch protection not enabled on development/release branches |
| CI-Tests | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | 3 out of 3 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | partial | 2.2 / 7.5 | Found 1/3 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3 |
| Contributors | not met | 0 / 2.5 | project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0 |
| Dangerous-Workflow | met | 10 / 10 | no dangerous workflow patterns detected |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | not met | 0 / 7.5 | no update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | not met | 0 / 5 | project is not fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| Packaging | met | 5 / 5 | packaging workflow detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 1 / 5 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2 |
| SAST | not met | 0 / 5 | SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0 |
| Security-Policy | not met | 0 / 5 | security policy file not detected |
| Signed-Releases | not met | 0 / 7.5 | Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases. |
| Token-Permissions | not met | 0 / 7.5 | detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions |
| Vulnerabilities | partial | 1.5 / 7.5 | 8 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### Dependency advisories — 85/100 (Excellent)

Matched the npm:camofox-browser@2.4.7 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 171 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct dependencies free of known advisories | met | 35 / 35 | no direct dependency carries a known advisory |
| Indirect dependencies free of known advisories | partial | 10 / 25 | 1 affected: adm-zip 0.5.18 (high 7.5) |
| No advisories left outstanding | met | 40 / 40 | no advisory has been public longer than 90 days |

### Malicious dependencies — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| No dependency reported as a malicious package | met | 100 / 100 | no dependency is reported as a malicious package |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Exceptional)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 70/100 (Good)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight: agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but its absence must never gate the top of the scale (calibration saturates at raw 91, so 100/100 remains reachable with AI Readiness at zero).

### Agent context & guidance — 85/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | .clinerules, .cursor/rules/001-camofox-core.mdc, .cursor/rules/010-cli-commands.mdc, .cursor/rules/020-api-endpoints.mdc, .cursor/rules/030-workflows.mdc, .cursor/rules/040-anti-patterns.mdc, .cursor/rules/050-cli-dev.mdc, .cursor/rules/060-routes-dev.mdc, .cursor/rules/070-search-macros-presets.mdc, .github/copilot-instructions.md, .windsurfrules, GEMINI.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | met | 40 / 40 | 97 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 55/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | not met | 0 / 18 | — |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | not met | 0 / 11 | — |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | tsconfig.json |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | met | 10 / 10 | 8 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| Automated maintenance | not met | 0 / 8 | no automated dependency updates observed |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | partial | 2 / 10 | dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 2 |

### Code legibility for models — 81/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | partial | 27 / 45 | JavaScript with type-check config (tsconfig.json) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 53.9 / 55 | 3/157 source files over 60KB |

## Collection warnings

- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
- GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt