Public record
Software health reportschema 0.32.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-20 07:37 UTC

sandlbn / Phosphor

A SID music player for USBSID-Pico hardware and Commodore Ultimate 64, supporting both hardware SID chips and emulated SID playback.

RustMIT★ 20 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Feb 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindDesktop applicationhow this is determined

sandlbn/Phosphor holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on Security (31/100). It was last updated 14 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

53
overall / 100
Moderate

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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Marcin SpoczynskiPersonal account
59 followers131 public repossince Oct 2012Intel Labs

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 publishTags
crates.iophosphorpoints to another repo — not scored0.0.1312361 days agorendererpbrvulkangame-developmentgraphics

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 14 days ago
13.8/36Commit cadence20/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume148 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year148
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push14
active_weeks_last_year20
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases24 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 41 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~9.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count24
latest_release_tagv0.4.5
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release41
mean_days_between_releases9.6

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

35Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
20.7/60Stars20 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars20
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
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

Sustainability & Governance

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

50Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth1 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution100% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance97/97 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs97
open_issues0
closed_issues5
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
12.8/25Owner reach59 followers of sandlbn
25/25Track record131 public repos, account ~13 yr old
Inputs used
followers59
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginsandlbn
public_repos131
account_age_days5,055
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

60Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscommodore64, c64, ultimate64
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_site
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

31At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0.8/2.5Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities24 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
13.4/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories5 affected: image 0.22.5 (moderate 5.5), time 0.1.45 (moderate 6.2), rand 0.7.3 (low), +2 more
2.9/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories10 affected: image 0.18.0 (critical 9.8), crossbeam-utils 0.7.2 (high 8.1), lock_api 0.3.4 (moderate 5.5), +7 more
15.5/40No advisories left outstanding15 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 2,555 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories29
affected_packages15
assessed_packages212
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitycritical 1, high 1, moderate 4, low 1, unknown 8
direct_affected_packages5
Matched the crates:phosphor@0.0.1 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 212 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.

49Weak · 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 history77 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.77
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapMakefile
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
50.7/55Manageable file sizes5/64 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes258,917
source_files_sampled64
oversized_source_files5

Key facts

20GitHub stars
1contributors
148commits, last 12 months
14days since last push
24releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • crates package 'phosphor' points at a different repository (https://github.com/trashbyte/phosphor); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-20 07:36 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests27 out of 27 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
3Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities24 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 26
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.ioiced0.14Cargo.toml
crates.iorfd0.15Cargo.toml
crates.iomos65020.8Cargo.toml
crates.iousbsid-pico0.1.13Cargo.toml
crates.iousbsid-pico-config0.1.1Cargo.toml
crates.iogosh-dlCargo.toml
crates.ioresid-rsCargo.toml
crates.iocpal0.15Cargo.toml
crates.iosidlite-sys0.1.1Cargo.toml
crates.iosidplayfp-sys0.1.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioultimate640.5Cargo.toml
crates.iourl2.5Cargo.toml
crates.iocrossbeam-channel0.5Cargo.toml
crates.iorand0.8Cargo.toml
crates.iomd50.7Cargo.toml
crates.iowalkdir2Cargo.toml
crates.iotiny_http0.12Cargo.toml
crates.iomp3lame-encoder0.2.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioenv_logger0.11Cargo.toml
crates.iolog0.4Cargo.toml
crates.ioimage0.25.9Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.49.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioreqwest0.13.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1Cargo.toml
crates.ioopen5Cargo.toml
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

Dependency advisories 15

Installing crates:phosphor@0.0.1 pulls in 212 packages, direct and transitive: 15 carry known advisories, of which 5 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
image0.18.0indirectcritical40.23.12
crossbeam-utils0.7.2indirecthigh20.8.7
image0.22.5directmoderate20.23.12
time0.1.45directmoderate20.2.23
lock_api0.3.4indirectmoderate60.4.2
memoffset0.5.6indirectmoderate20.6.2
rand0.7.3directlow20.10.1
cgmath0.17.0directunknown2
rusttype0.8.3directunknown1
fxhash0.2.1indirectunknown1
lzw0.10.0indirectunknown10.10.1-0
memmap0.7.0indirectunknown10.7.1-0
rand_os0.1.3indirectunknown1
rusttype0.7.9indirectunknown1
stb_truetype0.3.1indirectunknown1

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 v0.32.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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