Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-10 07:42 UTC

ryan-wong-coder / trustdb

Self-hosted tamper-evident evidence database for files, audit events, and data handoffs with portable offline verification

GoAGPL-3.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2026forkView on GitHub ↗
KindWeb interfaceNetwork serviceDesktop applicationCommand-line toolhow this is determined

ryan-wong-coder/trustdb holds a health index of 34 out of 100, placing it in the At Risk band. It scores highest on AI Readiness (76/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (12/100). It was last updated 7 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

34
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.

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

Ownership

ryan-wong-coderPersonal account
4 followers40 public repossince Feb 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Gogithub.com/wowtrust/trustdb/v2points to another repo — not scoredv2.0.1-412 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

36Weak · 21% of overall

Development activity

59Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 7 days ago
4.8/36Commit cadence — 7/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 255 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year255
human_commit_share0.95
days_since_last_push7
active_weeks_last_year7

Release discipline

1Critical
How it's scored
0/27Ships releases — no releases published
0/36Release recency — no releases
0/27Release cadence — no releases
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count0
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?

12Critical · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

1Critical
How it's scored
0/60Stars — 0 stars
0/25Forks — 0 forks
0/15Watchers — 0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

25At Risk
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (AGPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

43Weak · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

14Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 96% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 3 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.96

Issue & PR responsiveness

74Good
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
30/30PR acceptance — 1/1 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs1
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

48Weak
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
5/25Owner reach — 4 followers of ryan-wong-coder
23.7/25Track record — 40 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers4
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginryan-wong-coder
public_repos40
account_age_days2,360
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

49Weak · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

48Weak
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 11 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

50Moderate
How it's scored
0/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://www.trustdb.ryan-wong.cn/
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics—
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://www.trustdb.ryan-wong.cn/
docs_sitehttps://www.trustdb.ryan-wong.cn/
has_readmeno
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionno

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

46Weak
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
0/2.5CI-Tests — 0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
0/5Packaging — no data
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 40 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.6
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

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.

76Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — website/AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 95 of 95 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share1
agent_instruction_fileswebsite/AGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes1,440

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

74Good
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — clients/desktop/go.mod, clients/web/go.mod, go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — clients/desktop/frontend/tsconfig.json, clients/web/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 5 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum, package-lock.json
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsclients/desktop/frontend/tsconfig.json, clients/web/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsclients/desktop/go.mod, clients/web/go.mod, go.mod, scripts/fisco-bcos/contract-test/go.mod, scripts/fisco-bcos/smoke-client/go.mod, third_party/fisco-bcos/bcos-c-sdk-a278b4749e34/go.mod, third_party/fisco-bcos/go-sdk-v3.0.2/go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share0.05

Code legibility for models

99Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
53.6/55Manageable file sizes — 16/611 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes288,013
source_files_sampled611
oversized_source_files16

Machine-readable interfaces

40Weak
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)
0/20MCP server
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_ofnetwork-service

Key facts

0GitHub stars
3contributors
255commits, last 12 months
7days since last push
0releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Go, npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Community profile unavailable
  • go package 'github.com/wowtrust/trustdb/v2' points at a different repository (https://github.com/wowtrust/trustdb); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/wowtrust/trustdb/v2/clients/web' from its registry
  • Could not fetch go package 'github.com/wowtrust/trustdb/v2/clients/desktop' from its registry
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.6 / 10
4.6aggregate

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 · 2026-08-10 07:42 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 1 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/29 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
10Fuzzingproject is fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
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
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities40 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 41
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/FISCO-BCOS/bcos-c-sdkv0.0.0-20240726021820-a278b4749e34go.mod
Gogithub.com/FISCO-BCOS/cryptov0.0.0-20200202032121-bd8ab0b5d4f1go.mod
Gogithub.com/FISCO-BCOS/go-sdk/v3v3.0.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/TarsCloud/TarsGov1.4.5go.mod
Gogithub.com/cockroachdb/pebblev1.1.5go.mod
Gogithub.com/emmansun/gmsmv0.44.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/ethereum/go-ethereumv1.17.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/fxamacker/cbor/v2v2.9.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/golang/snappyv1.0.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/miekg/pkcs11v1.1.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/nats-io/nats-server/v2v2.14.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/nats-io/nats.gov1.52.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_golangv1.23.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_modelv0.6.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/prometheus/commonv0.66.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/rs/zerologv1.35.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/viperv1.21.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/tikv/client-go/v2v2.0.7go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.53.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.56.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.22.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.47.0go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/genprotov0.0.0-20240123012728-ef4313101c80go.mod
Gogoogle.golang.org/grpcv1.82.1go.mod
Gogopkg.in/natefinch/lumberjack.v2v2.2.1go.mod
npm@gsap/react^2.1.2website/package.json
npm@phosphor-icons/react^2.1.10website/package.json
npmgsap^3.15.0website/package.json
npmreact19.2.0website/package.json
npmreact-dom19.2.0website/package.json
Gogithub.com/cockroachdb/pebblev1.1.5clients/desktop/go.mod
Gogithub.com/wailsapp/wails/v2v2.12.0clients/desktop/go.mod
Gogithub.com/wowtrust/trustdb/v2v2.0.0-00010101000000-000000000000clients/desktop/go.mod
npm@vueuse/core^11.1.0clients/web/package.json
npmgsap^3.15.0clients/web/package.json
npmlucide-vue-next^0.468.0clients/web/package.json
npmpinia^2.2.4clients/web/package.json
npmvue^3.5.13clients/web/package.json
npmvue-router^4.4.5clients/web/package.json
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with ryan-wong-coder/trustdb. Read them side by side →

100coder/coderSecure environments for developers and their agentsExceptional100mattermost/mattermostMattermost is an open source platform for secure collaboration across the entire software development lifecycle..Exceptional100apache/airflowApache Airflow - A platform to programmatically author, schedule, and monitor workflowsExceptional100hashicorp/consulConsul is a distributed, highly available, and data center aware solution to connect and configure applications across dynamic, distributed infrastructure.Exceptional99argoproj/argo-workflowsWorkflow Engine for KubernetesExceptional99kubernetes-sigs/kueueKubernetes-native Job QueueingExceptional

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 statistics — Go.