Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-04 20:40 UTC

rust-lang / cc-rs

Rust library for build scripts to compile C/C++ code into a Rust library

RustApache-2.0★ 2,142 stars⑂ 601 forkssince Nov 2014View on GitHub ↗

rust-lang/cc-rs holds a health index of 94 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (98/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (62/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

94
overall / 100
Exceptional

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.

94
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 80 is calibrated to 94 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

17,933 followers246 public repossince Sep 2013

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iocc1.4.081,351,57621611 days agobuild-dependencies
crates.iofind-msvc-tools0.1.955,198,57310186 days agobuild-dependencies

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

98Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 1 days ago
33.2/36Commit cadence48/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume203 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year203
human_commit_share0.58
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year48

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 11 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~11.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagcc-v1.4.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release11
mean_days_between_releases11.7
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?

76Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
54/60Stars2,142 stars
23.2/25Forks601 forks
7.6/15Watchers24 watchers
Inputs used
forks601
stars2,142
watchers24
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
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
80/80Monthly downloads136,550,149 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescc, find-msvc-tools
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads1,441,125,713
monthly_downloads136,550,149
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?

84Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
25.2/54Bus factor2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
12.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 46% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth98 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 55 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor2
contributors_sampled98
top_contributor_share0.463
How it's scored
32.9/42Issue resolution78% of issues closed
25/30PR acceptance981/1,177 decided PRs merged
12.3/13Newcomer PR acceptance18/19 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
12/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 22/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
merged_prs981
open_issues135
closed_issues491
prs_merged_7d24
prs_decided_7d26
prs_merged_30d30
prs_decided_30d33
issue_closed_ratio0.784
closed_unmerged_prs196
first_time_authors_30d5
first_time_prs_merged_30d18
first_time_prs_decided_30d19
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
25/25Owner reach17,933 followers of rust-lang
25/25Track record246 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers17,933
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginrust-lang
public_repos246
account_age_days4,710
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable2 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 11 days ago
20/20Version history216 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescc, find-msvc-tools
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish11

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

62Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows6 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
18/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

55Moderate
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/cc
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttps://docs.rs/cc
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/cc
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

83Excellent · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.2/2.5CI-Tests28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
6/7.5Code-ReviewFound 22/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 55 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
5/5Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate7.9
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 advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages16
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 crates:cc@1.4.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 16 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.

62Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history55 of 58 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.948
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml, dev-tools/cc-test/Cargo.toml, dev-tools/gen-target-info/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance18 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, dev-tools/cc-test/Cargo.toml, dev-tools/gen-target-info/Cargo.toml, dev-tools/gen-windows-sys-binding/Cargo.toml, dev-tools/wasi-test/Cargo.toml, find-msvc-tools/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.18
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
53.2/55Manageable file sizes2/62 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes195,055
source_files_sampled62
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

2,142GitHub stars
98contributors
203commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
100releases
2bus factor
135open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 601 ⇿
0Stars
601Forks
100Releases

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.

0100200300400500600582202014-112020-092026-07
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 11 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.9 / 10
7.9aggregate

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 · 2026-08-04 20:40 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
9CI-Tests28 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
8Code-ReviewFound 22/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 8
10Contributorsproject has 55 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 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 3
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iofind-msvc-tools0.1.9Cargo.toml
crates.iojobserver0.1.30Cargo.toml
crates.ioshlex2.0.1Cargo.toml
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 3 direct and 8 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iofind-msvc-toolsdirect
crates.iojobserverdirect
crates.ioshlexdirect
crates.iolibcindirect
crates.ioregexindirect
crates.iorusqliteindirect
crates.ioserdeindirect
crates.ioserde_jsonindirect
crates.iotempfileindirect
crates.iowhichindirect
crates.iowindows-bindgenindirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing crates:cc@1.4.0 pulls in 16 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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.