Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-06 19:51 UTC

rgglez / gofiber-recaptcha3-middleware

Middleware for gofiber implementing Google reCAPTCHA v3 validation

Go · MakefileApache-2.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince May 2025View on GitHub ↗

KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

#fiber #filter #gofiber #golang #middleware #recaptcha-v3 #security

rgglez/gofiber-recaptcha3-middleware holds a health index of 28 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on Vitality (52/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (24/100). It was last updated 8 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

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.

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)

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

Ownership

Rodolfo González GonzálezPersonal account

190 followers90 public repossince Jan 2023

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
Go	github.com/rgglez/gofiber-recaptcha3-middleware	v0.0.1	-	1	43 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

52Moderate · 21% of overall

Development activity

39Weak

How it's scored

28.8/36	Push recency — last push 8 days ago
2.8/36	Commit cadence — 4/52 weeks with commits
6.3/18	Commit volume — 4 commits in the last year
1/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

commits_last_year	4
human_commit_share	—
days_since_last_push	8
active_weeks_last_year	4

Release discipline

72Good

How it's scored

16.2/27	Ships releases — 1 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36	Release recency — latest release 43 days ago
12.6/27	Release cadence — cadence unknown (single release)
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	1
latest_release_tag	v0.0.1
releases_from_tags	yes
days_since_latest_release	43
mean_days_between_releases	—

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?

24At Risk · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical

How it's scored

0/60	Stars — 0 stars
0/25	Forks — 0 forks
0/15	Watchers — 1 watchers

Inputs used

forks	0
stars	0
watchers	1
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

50Moderate

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	7
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

35Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

10Critical

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5	Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	1
top_contributor_share	1

Issue & PR responsiveness

1Critical

How it's scored

0/42	Issue resolution — no issues or no data
0/30	PR acceptance — no decided pull requests or no data
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

merged_prs	0
open_issues	0
closed_issues	0
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	—
closed_unmerged_prs	0
first_time_authors_30d	0
first_time_prs_merged_30d	0
first_time_prs_decided_30d	0

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

Ownership & stewardship

58Moderate

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
16.4/25	Owner reach — 190 followers of rgglez
20.3/25	Track record — 90 public repos, account ~3 yr old

Inputs used

followers	190
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	rgglez
public_repos	90
account_age_days	1,334

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

Package maintenance

84Excellent

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on go
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 43 days ago
4/20	Version history — 1 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/rgglez/gofiber-recaptcha3-middleware
ecosystems	go
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	43

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

25At Risk · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

1Critical

How it's scored

0/24	CI workflows
0/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
0/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data

Inputs used

has_ci	no
has_tests	no
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

60Moderate

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
0/15	Documentation / homepage site
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 7 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	fiber, filter, gofiber, golang, middleware, recaptcha-v3, security
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	—
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

25At Risk · 16% of overall

Security posture

16Critical

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5	CI-Tests — no data
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5	Code-Review — Found 0/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5	Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no data
0/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
0.8/7.5	Maintained — 2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — no data
0/5	SAST — no SAST tool detected
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — no data
0/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 17 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	12
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	6
scorecard_aggregate	1.6

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

63Moderate

How it's scored

13.4/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — 1 affected: github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2 2.52.9 (high 7.7)
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
33.5/40	No advisories left outstanding — 1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 209 days ago

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	21
affected_packages	5
assessed_packages	14
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	high 1, moderate 1, unknown 3
direct_affected_packages	1

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 14 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.

50Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

25At Risk

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.gofiber.io/llms.txt)
0/40	Legible commit history — no data

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	yes
llms_txt_url	https://docs.gofiber.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share	—
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

54Moderate

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
0/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no data
0/8	Automated maintenance — no data
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	no
lockfiles	go.sum
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	—
toolchain_manifests	examples/backend-multi/go.mod, examples/backend-single-global/go.mod, go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/3 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Go
largest_source_bytes	4,106
source_files_sampled	3
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

40Weak

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20	MCP server
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	network-service

Key facts

0GitHub stars

1contributors

4commits, last 12 months

8days since last push

1releases

1bus factor

0open issues

Gopackage ecosystems

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 1.6 / 10

1.6aggregate

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 · 2026-09-06 19:51 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
0	Branch-Protection	branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/a	CI-Tests	no pull request found
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0	Code-Review	Found 0/16 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0	Contributors	project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/a	Dangerous-Workflow	no workflows found
0	Dependency-Update-Tool	no update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
1	Maintained	2 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 1
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
n/a	Pinned-Dependencies	no dependencies found
0	SAST	no SAST tool detected
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
n/a	Token-Permissions	No tokens found
0	Vulnerabilities	17 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 2

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
Go	github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2	`v2.52.9`	go.mod
Go	resty.dev/v3	`v3.0.0-beta.3`	go.mod

All dependencies 14

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 12 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2	`2.52.9`	direct
Go	resty.dev/v3	`3.0.0-beta.3`	direct
Go	github.com/andybalholm/brotli	`1.2.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`1.6.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/klauspost/compress	`1.18.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/mattn/go-colorable	`0.1.14`	indirect
Go	github.com/mattn/go-isatty	`0.0.20`	indirect
Go	github.com/mattn/go-runewidth	`0.0.16`	indirect
Go	github.com/rgglez/gofiber-recaptcha3-middleware	`0.0.0-20250604051152-c71feec66e88`	indirect
Go	github.com/rivo/uniseg	`0.4.7`	indirect
Go	github.com/valyala/bytebufferpool	`1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/valyala/fasthttp	`1.64.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/net	`0.42.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`0.34.0`	indirect

Dependency advisories 5

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 14 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 5 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
github.com/gofiber/fiber/v2	`2.52.9`	direct	high	7	`3.3.0`
golang.org/x/net	`0.42.0`	indirect	moderate	11	`1.27.0-rc.3`
github.com/klauspost/compress	`1.18.0`	indirect	unknown	1	`1.18.7`
github.com/valyala/fasthttp	`1.64.0`	indirect	unknown	1	`1.70.0`
golang.org/x/sys	`0.34.0`	indirect	unknown	1	`0.44.0`

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.

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.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

More detail

Feedback

Related records