Software health reportschema 0.30.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-03 04:04 UTC

rustls / hyper-rustls

Integration between hyper HTTP library and rustls TLS stack

RustCustom license★ 361 stars⑂ 165 forkssince Oct 2016View on GitHub ↗

rustls/hyper-rustls holds a health index of 90 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (82/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (60/100). It was last updated 4 days ago. 2 contributors account for most of its recent work.

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.

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 76 is calibrated to 90 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

rustlsOrganization

192 followers27 public repossince May 2020

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
crates.io	hyper-rustls	0.27.9	44,437,813	53	110 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

82Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

82Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 4 days ago
19.4/36	Commit cadence — 28/52 weeks with commits
16.1/18	Commit volume — 61 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 18 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	61
human_commit_share	0.6
days_since_last_push	4
active_weeks_last_year	28

Release discipline

82Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 25 releases published
27/36	Release recency — latest release 110 days ago
19.8/27	Release cadence — a release every ~83.2 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data

Inputs used

releases_count	25
latest_release_tag	v/0.27.9
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	110
mean_days_between_releases	83.2

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?

67Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

67Good

How it's scored

41.5/60	Stars — 361 stars
18.5/25	Forks — 165 forks
6.7/15	Watchers — 17 watchers

Inputs used

forks	165
stars	361
watchers	17
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

44Weak

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
16.9/22.5	License — license file present, not a recognized license
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	2
has_contributing	no
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	no
readme_badge_services	github.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

100Exceptional

How it's scored

80/80	Monthly downloads — 44,437,813 downloads/month across crates
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	hyper-rustls
dependents	—
ecosystems	crates
total_downloads	552,764,230
monthly_downloads	44,437,813
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?

81Excellent · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

63Moderate

How it's scored

25.2/54	Bus factor — 2 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
14.6/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 35% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 50 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 59 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	2
contributors_sampled	50
top_contributor_share	0.353

Issue & PR responsiveness

83Excellent

How it's scored

36.2/42	Issue resolution — 86% of issues closed
21.1/30	PR acceptance — 188/267 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
15/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — all changesets reviewed

Inputs used

merged_prs	188
open_issues	13
closed_issues	82
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	0
prs_decided_30d	0
issue_closed_ratio	0.863
closed_unmerged_prs	79
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): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

86Excellent

How it's scored

30/30	Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20	Verified domain — verified-domain status not read for this organization
16.4/25	Owner reach — 192 followers of rustls
22.5/25	Track record — 27 public repos, account ~6 yr old

Inputs used

followers	192
owner_type	Organization
is_verified	—
owner_login	rustls
public_repos	27
account_age_days	2,275

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

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 110 days ago
20/20	Version history — 53 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	hyper-rustls
ecosystems	crates
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	110

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

71Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 1 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
0/16	Linter config
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 23 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	no
has_linter_config	no
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

75Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.rs/hyper-rustls
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 2 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	rust, hyper
has_wiki	yes
homepage	—
docs_site	https://docs.rs/hyper-rustls
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?

78Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

73Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5	Branch-Protection — no data
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 23 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5	Code-Review — all changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 59 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 18 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5	Packaging — no data
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — no data
7.5/7.5	Token-Permissions — GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	15
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	3
scorecard_aggregate	7.3

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	119
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 119 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.

60Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

15Critical

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
15.1/40	Legible commit history — 17 of 60 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	0.283
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

64Moderate

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
0/11	Lint / format config
11/11	Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 40 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	Cargo.lock
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	no
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.4

Code legibility for models

100Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
55/55	Manageable file sizes — 0/8 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Rust
largest_source_bytes	17,445
source_files_sampled	8
oversized_source_files	0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional

How it's scored

0/40	API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20	MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40	Runnable examples — examples

Inputs used

example_dirs	examples
has_mcp_signal	no
api_schema_files	—
interfaces_expected_of	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

361GitHub stars

50contributors

61commits, last 12 months

4days since last push

25releases

2bus factor

13open 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 ★ / 165 ⇿

0Stars

165Forks

25Releases

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.

Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.3 / 10

7.3aggregate

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 · 2026-08-03 04:04 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
n/a	Branch-Protection	internal 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
10	CI-Tests	23 out of 23 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10	Code-Review	all changesets reviewed
10	Contributors	project has 59 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
9	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	18 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/a	Packaging	packaging workflow not detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
n/a	Signed-Releases	no releases found
10	Token-Permissions	GitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 11

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
crates.io	http	`1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	hyper	`1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	hyper-util	`0.1`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	log	`0.4.4`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	rustls-native-certs	`0.8`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	rustls-platform-verifier	`0.7`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	rustls	`0.23`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tokio	`1.0`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tokio-rustls	`0.26`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	tower-service	`0.3`	Cargo.toml
crates.io	webpki-roots	`1`	Cargo.toml

All dependencies 119

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 108 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
crates.io	http	`1.5.0`	direct
crates.io	hyper	`1.11.0`	direct
crates.io	hyper-util	`0.1.20`	direct
crates.io	log	`0.4.33`	direct
crates.io	rustls	`0.23.43`	direct
crates.io	rustls-native-certs	`0.8.4`	direct
crates.io	rustls-platform-verifier	`0.7.0`	direct
crates.io	tokio	`1.53.1`	direct
crates.io	tokio-rustls	`0.26.4`	direct
crates.io	tower-service	`0.3.3`	direct
crates.io	webpki-roots	`1.0.9`	direct
crates.io	aho-corasick	`1.1.4`	indirect
crates.io	atomic-waker	`1.1.2`	indirect
crates.io	aws-lc-fips-sys	`0.13.14`	indirect
crates.io	aws-lc-rs	`1.16.3`	indirect
crates.io	aws-lc-sys	`0.40.0`	indirect
crates.io	bindgen	`0.72.1`	indirect
crates.io	bitflags	`2.11.1`	indirect
crates.io	bytes	`1.11.1`	indirect
crates.io	cc	`1.2.60`	indirect
crates.io	cexpr	`0.6.0`	indirect
crates.io	cfg-if	`1.0.4`	indirect
crates.io	clang-sys	`1.8.1`	indirect
crates.io	cmake	`0.1.58`	indirect
crates.io	combine	`4.6.7`	indirect
crates.io	core-foundation	`0.10.1`	indirect
crates.io	core-foundation-sys	`0.8.7`	indirect
crates.io	dunce	`1.0.5`	indirect
crates.io	either	`1.15.0`	indirect
crates.io	equivalent	`1.0.2`	indirect
crates.io	find-msvc-tools	`0.1.9`	indirect
crates.io	fnv	`1.0.7`	indirect
crates.io	fs_extra	`1.3.0`	indirect
crates.io	futures-channel	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	futures-core	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	futures-sink	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	futures-task	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	futures-util	`0.3.32`	indirect
crates.io	getrandom	`0.2.17`	indirect
crates.io	getrandom	`0.3.4`	indirect
crates.io	glob	`0.3.3`	indirect
crates.io	h2	`0.4.14`	indirect
crates.io	hashbrown	`0.17.0`	indirect
crates.io	http-body	`1.0.1`	indirect
crates.io	http-body-util	`0.1.4`	indirect
crates.io	httparse	`1.10.1`	indirect
crates.io	httpdate	`1.0.3`	indirect
crates.io	indexmap	`2.14.0`	indirect
crates.io	itertools	`0.13.0`	indirect
crates.io	itoa	`1.0.18`	indirect
crates.io	jni	`0.22.4`	indirect
crates.io	jni-macros	`0.22.4`	indirect
crates.io	jni-sys	`0.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	jni-sys-macros	`0.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	jobserver	`0.1.34`	indirect
crates.io	libc	`0.2.185`	indirect
crates.io	libloading	`0.8.9`	indirect
crates.io	memchr	`2.8.0`	indirect
crates.io	minimal-lexical	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	mio	`1.2.0`	indirect
crates.io	nom	`7.1.3`	indirect
crates.io	once_cell	`1.21.4`	indirect
crates.io	openssl-probe	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	pin-project-lite	`0.2.17`	indirect
crates.io	prettyplease	`0.2.37`	indirect
crates.io	proc-macro2	`1.0.106`	indirect
crates.io	quote	`1.0.45`	indirect
crates.io	r-efi	`5.3.0`	indirect
crates.io	regex	`1.12.3`	indirect
crates.io	regex-automata	`0.4.14`	indirect
crates.io	regex-syntax	`0.8.10`	indirect
crates.io	ring	`0.17.14`	indirect
crates.io	rustc-hash	`2.1.2`	indirect
crates.io	rustc_version	`0.4.1`	indirect
crates.io	rustls-pki-types	`1.14.0`	indirect
crates.io	rustls-platform-verifier-android	`0.1.1`	indirect
crates.io	rustls-webpki	`0.103.13`	indirect
crates.io	same-file	`1.0.6`	indirect
crates.io	schannel	`0.1.29`	indirect
crates.io	security-framework	`3.7.0`	indirect
crates.io	security-framework-sys	`2.17.0`	indirect
crates.io	semver	`1.0.28`	indirect
crates.io	shlex	`1.3.0`	indirect
crates.io	simd_cesu8	`1.1.1`	indirect
crates.io	simdutf8	`0.1.5`	indirect
crates.io	slab	`0.4.12`	indirect
crates.io	smallvec	`1.15.1`	indirect
crates.io	socket2	`0.6.3`	indirect
crates.io	subtle	`2.6.1`	indirect
crates.io	syn	`2.0.117`	indirect
crates.io	thiserror	`2.0.18`	indirect
crates.io	thiserror-impl	`2.0.18`	indirect
crates.io	tokio-macros	`2.7.0`	indirect
crates.io	tokio-util	`0.7.18`	indirect
crates.io	tracing	`0.1.44`	indirect
crates.io	tracing-core	`0.1.36`	indirect
crates.io	try-lock	`0.2.5`	indirect
crates.io	unicode-ident	`1.0.24`	indirect
crates.io	untrusted	`0.9.0`	indirect
crates.io	walkdir	`2.5.0`	indirect
crates.io	want	`0.3.1`	indirect
crates.io	wasi	`0.11.1+wasi-snapshot-preview1`	indirect
crates.io	wasip2	`1.0.3+wasi-0.2.9`	indirect
crates.io	webpki-root-certs	`1.0.7`	indirect
crates.io	winapi-util	`0.1.11`	indirect
crates.io	windows-link	`0.2.1`	indirect
crates.io	windows-sys	`0.52.0`	indirect
crates.io	windows-sys	`0.61.2`	indirect
crates.io	windows-targets	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_aarch64_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_gnu	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_i686_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnu	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_gnullvm	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	windows_x86_64_msvc	`0.52.6`	indirect
crates.io	wit-bindgen	`0.57.1`	indirect
crates.io	zeroize	`1.8.2`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 119 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

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.

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 v0.30.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — crates.io.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records