Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-29 18:35 UTC

santedb / santeguard

SanteGuard Audit Repository

JavaScriptApache-2.0★ 1 star⑂ 0 forkssince Aug 2018View on GitHub ↗

santedb/santeguard holds a health index of 12 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (35/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (15/100). It was last updated 35 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

12
overall / 100
Critical

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.

12
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 26 is calibrated to 20 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

14 followers60 public repossince Jun 2018

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
NuGetSanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog2.5.0-291458 days agosantedbcoreags

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

27At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recencylast push 35 days ago
0/36Commit cadence0/52 weeks with commits
0/18Commit volume0 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year0
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push35
active_weeks_last_year0
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases1 releases published
0/36Release recencylatest release 2,027 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencecadence unknown (single release)
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count1
latest_release_tag2.0.76
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2,027
mean_days_between_releases

Community & Adoption

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

22At Risk · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars1 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers2 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars1
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingyes
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?

35Weak · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 99% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth2 contributors
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.991
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
0/30PR acceptance0/4 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_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs4
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domain
8.5/25Owner reach14 followers of santedb
25/25Track record60 public repos, account ~8 yr old
Inputs used
followers14
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginsantedb
public_repos60
account_age_days2,993
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on nuget
4/35Publish recencylatest publish 1,458 days ago
20/20Version history29 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesSanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog
ecosystemsnuget
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,458

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

15Critical · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttp://santesuite.org
10/10Repository description
0/10Topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://santesuite.org
docs_sitehttp://santesuite.org
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
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
6.8/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0/2.5CI-Testsno data
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
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesno data
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate2.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
14/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: Newtonsoft.Json 12.0.3 (high 7.5)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
33.7/40No advisories left outstanding1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,529 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages4
unassessed_packages5
affected_by_severityhigh 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 4 resolved dependencies against OSV. 5 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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.

16Critical · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0.5/40Legible commit history1 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.01
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapSanteGuard.Client/SanteGuard.Client.csproj, SanteGuard.Docker/SanteGuard.Docker.csproj, SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog/SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesno data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsSanteGuard.Client/SanteGuard.Client.csproj, SanteGuard.Docker/SanteGuard.Docker.csproj, SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog/SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codeJavaScript without a type-check config
51.5/55Manageable file sizes2/31 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes866,392
source_files_sampled31
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

1GitHub stars
2contributors
0commits, last 12 months
35days since last push
1releases
1bus factor
0open issues
NuGetpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch nuget package 'SanteGuard.Client' from its registry
  • Could not fetch nuget package 'SanteGuard.Docker' from its registry

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 2.3 / 10
2.3aggregate

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 · 2026-08-29 18:35 UTC

9Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
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
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
n/aPinned-Dependenciesno dependencies found
0SASTno SAST tool detected
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetSanteDB.Client$(VersionNumber)SanteGuard.Client/SanteGuard.Client.csproj
NuGetSanteDB.Docker.Core$(VersionNumber)SanteGuard.Docker/SanteGuard.Docker.csproj
NuGetAtnaApi.NetStandard1.2.0SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog/SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog.csproj
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.3SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog/SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog.csproj
NuGetSanteDB.Core.Api$(VersionNumber)SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog/SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog.csproj
NuGetSanteDB.Core.Model$(VersionNumber)SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog/SanteGuard.Messaging.Syslog.csproj
All dependencies 9

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 2 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
NuGetAtnaApi.NetStandard1.2.0direct
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json12.0.3direct
NuGetNewtonsoft.Json13.0.3direct
NuGetSanteDB.Clientdirect
NuGetSanteDB.Core.Apidirect
NuGetSanteDB.Core.Modeldirect
NuGetSanteDB.Docker.Coredirect
NuGetAtnaApi1.1.4.0indirect
NuGetSanteDB.Server.Pluginindirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 4 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 5 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
Newtonsoft.Json12.0.3directhigh113.0.1

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsNuGet.