Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-14 03:27 UTC

semihalev / sdns

A high-performance, recursive DNS resolver server with DNSSEC support, focused on preserving privacy.

GoMIT★ 1,076 stars⑂ 69 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

#dns #dns-server #dnssec #dns-resolver #edns #dns-over-https #dns-over-tls #resolver #dns-privacy #dns-over-quic

semihalev/sdns holds a health index of 92 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (90/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (67/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts 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 78 is calibrated to 92 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Yasar AlevPersonal account

156 followers38 public repossince Dec 2010@netdirekt @stoolap

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

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish
Go	github.com/semihalev/sdns	v1.8.2	-	58	12 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

82Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

77Good

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 5 days ago
13.2/36	Commit cadence — 19/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 250 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	250
human_commit_share	0.86
days_since_last_push	5
active_weeks_last_year	19

Release discipline

90Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 57 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 12 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~12.9 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	57
latest_release_tag	v1.8.2
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	12
mean_days_between_releases	12.9

Community & Adoption

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

78Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

72Good

How it's scored

49.2/60	Stars — 1,076 stars
15.3/25	Forks — 69 forks
7.1/15	Watchers — 20 watchers

Inputs used

forks	69
stars	1,076
watchers	20
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

85Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (MIT)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	5
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	shields.io
has_pull_request_template	no

Sustainability & Governance

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

67Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

33At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.7/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 97% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 14 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	14
top_contributor_share	0.967

Issue & PR responsiveness

86Excellent

How it's scored

42/42	Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
19.4/30	PR acceptance — 349/539 decided PRs merged
0/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
13.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 21/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9

Inputs used

merged_prs	349
open_issues	0
closed_issues	50
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	28
prs_decided_30d	28
issue_closed_ratio	1
closed_unmerged_prs	190
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

62Moderate

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
15.8/25	Owner reach — 156 followers of semihalev
23.6/25	Track record — 38 public repos, account ~15 yr old

Inputs used

followers	156
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	semihalev
public_repos	38
account_age_days	5,738

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 go
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 12 days ago
20/20	Version history — 58 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/semihalev/sdns
ecosystems	go
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	12

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

90Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 6 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — .golangci.yml
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4	.editorconfig
20/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 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	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

100Exceptional

How it's scored

30/30	README
25/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://sdns.dev
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 10 topics
10/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	dns, dns-server, dnssec, dns-resolver, edns, dns-over-https, dns-over-tls, resolver, dns-privacy, dns-over-quic
has_wiki	yes
homepage	https://sdns.dev
docs_site	https://sdns.dev
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	yes
has_description	yes

Security

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

77Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

71Good

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5	CI-Tests — 29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
1.2/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: Passing
6.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 21/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
5/5	Fuzzing — project is fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5	SAST — SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
5/5	Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
4.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	18
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	0
scorecard_aggregate	7.1

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	4
affected_packages	1
assessed_packages	110
unassessed_packages	0
affected_by_severity	unknown 1
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 110 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.

69Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 86 of 86 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	no
llms_txt_url	—
legible_history_share	1
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

80Excellent

How it's scored

18/18	One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — .golangci.yml
11/11	Static type checking — Go (statically typed)
10/10	Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8	Automated maintenance — 14 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	Gemfile.lock, go.sum
has_dockerfile	yes
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	Makefile
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	—
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0.14

Code legibility for models

99Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — Go (statically typed)
54.4/55	Manageable file sizes — 6/539 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	Go
largest_source_bytes	155,276
source_files_sampled	539
oversized_source_files	6

Key facts

1,076GitHub stars

14contributors

250commits, last 12 months

5days since last push

57releases

1bus factor

0open issues

Go, RubyGemspackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 69 ⇿

0Stars

69Forks

55Releases

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 1Minor 10Patch 43

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.1 / 10

7.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-14 03:26 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
3	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10	CI-Tests	29 out of 29 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
5	CII-Best-Practices	badge detected: Passing
9	Code-Review	Found 21/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 9
10	Contributors	project has 5 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
10	Fuzzing	project is fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
9	SAST	SAST tool detected but not run on all commits
10	Security-Policy	security policy file detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6	Vulnerabilities	4 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 15

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
Go	github.com/BurntSushi/toml	`v1.6.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/cespare/xxhash/v2	`v2.3.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify	`v1.10.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/miekg/dns	`v1.1.73`	go.mod
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.24.1`	go.mod
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_model	`v0.6.2`	go.mod
Go	github.com/quic-go/quic-go	`v0.62.0`	go.mod
Go	github.com/semihalev/zlog/v2	`v2.0.8`	go.mod
Go	github.com/spf13/cobra	`v1.10.2`	go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/sync	`v0.22.0`	go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`v0.47.0`	go.mod
Go	golang.org/x/time	`v0.15.0`	go.mod
Go	k8s.io/api	`v0.37.0`	go.mod
Go	k8s.io/apimachinery	`v0.37.0`	go.mod
Go	k8s.io/client-go	`v0.37.0`	go.mod

All dependencies 110

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 15 direct and 95 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
Go	github.com/burntsushi/toml	`v1.6.0`	direct
Go	github.com/cespare/xxhash/v2	`v2.3.0`	direct
Go	github.com/fsnotify/fsnotify	`v1.10.1`	direct
Go	github.com/miekg/dns	`v1.1.73`	direct
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_golang	`v1.24.1`	direct
Go	github.com/prometheus/client_model	`v0.6.2`	direct
Go	github.com/quic-go/quic-go	`v0.62.0`	direct
Go	github.com/semihalev/zlog/v2	`v2.0.8`	direct
Go	github.com/spf13/cobra	`v1.10.2`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/sync	`v0.22.0`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/sys	`v0.47.0`	direct
Go	golang.org/x/time	`v0.15.0`	direct
Go	k8s.io/api	`v0.37.0`	direct
Go	k8s.io/apimachinery	`v0.37.0`	direct
Go	k8s.io/client-go	`v0.37.0`	direct
Go	github.com/beorn7/perks	`v1.0.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/davecgh/go-spew	`v1.1.2-0.20180830191138-d8f796af33cc`	indirect
Go	github.com/emicklei/go-restful/v3	`v3.13.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/fxamacker/cbor/v2	`v2.9.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-logr/logr	`v1.4.3`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/jsonpointer	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/jsonreference	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/cmdutils	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/conv	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/fileutils	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/jsonutils	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/loading	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/mangling	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/netutils	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/pools	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/stringutils	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/typeutils	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/go-openapi/swag/yamlutils	`v0.27.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/gnostic-models	`v0.7.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/google/uuid	`v1.6.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/inconshreveable/mousetrap	`v1.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/json-iterator/go	`v1.1.12`	indirect
Go	github.com/kylelemons/godebug	`v1.1.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/modern-go/concurrent	`v0.0.0-20180306012644-bacd9c7ef1dd`	indirect
Go	github.com/modern-go/reflect2	`v1.0.3-0.20250322232337-35a7c28c31ee`	indirect
Go	github.com/munnerz/goautoneg	`v0.0.0-20191010083416-a7dc8b61c822`	indirect
Go	github.com/pmezard/go-difflib	`v1.0.1-0.20181226105442-5d4384ee4fb2`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/common	`v0.70.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/prometheus/procfs	`v0.21.1`	indirect
Go	github.com/quic-go/qpack	`v0.6.0`	indirect
Go	github.com/spf13/pflag	`v1.0.10`	indirect
Go	github.com/x448/float16	`v0.8.4`	indirect
Go	go.yaml.in/yaml/v2	`v2.4.4`	indirect
Go	go.yaml.in/yaml/v3	`v3.0.5`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/crypto	`v0.54.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/net	`v0.57.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/oauth2	`v0.36.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/term	`v0.45.0`	indirect
Go	golang.org/x/text	`v0.40.0`	indirect
Go	google.golang.org/protobuf	`v1.36.12-0.20260120151049-f2248ac996af`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/evanphx/json-patch.v4	`v4.13.0`	indirect
Go	gopkg.in/inf.v0	`v0.9.1`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/klog/v2	`v2.140.0`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/kube-openapi	`v0.0.0-20260721132016-d427ff9ee9ad`	indirect
Go	k8s.io/utils	`v0.0.0-20260626114624-be93311217bd`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/json	`v0.0.0-20250730193827-2d320260d730`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/randfill	`v1.0.0`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff/v6	`v6.4.2`	indirect
Go	sigs.k8s.io/yaml	`v1.6.0`	indirect
RubyGems	addressable	`2.9.0`	indirect
RubyGems	base64	`0.3.0`	indirect
RubyGems	bigdecimal	`4.1.2`	indirect
RubyGems	colorator	`1.1.0`	indirect
RubyGems	concurrent-ruby	`1.3.8`	indirect
RubyGems	csv	`3.3.6`	indirect
RubyGems	em-websocket	`0.5.3`	indirect
RubyGems	eventmachine	`1.2.7`	indirect
RubyGems	ffi	`1.17.4`	indirect
RubyGems	forwardable-extended	`2.6.0`	indirect
RubyGems	google-protobuf	`4.36.1`	indirect
RubyGems	http_parser.rb	`0.8.1`	indirect
RubyGems	i18n	`1.15.2`	indirect
RubyGems	jekyll	`4.4.1`	indirect
RubyGems	jekyll-sass-converter	`3.1.0`	indirect
RubyGems	jekyll-seo-tag	`2.9.0`	indirect
RubyGems	jekyll-sitemap	`1.4.0`	indirect
RubyGems	jekyll-watch	`2.2.1`	indirect
RubyGems	json	`2.21.2`	indirect
RubyGems	kramdown	`2.5.2`	indirect
RubyGems	kramdown-parser-gfm	`1.1.0`	indirect
RubyGems	liquid	`4.0.4`	indirect
RubyGems	listen	`3.10.0`	indirect
RubyGems	logger	`1.7.0`	indirect
RubyGems	mercenary	`0.4.0`	indirect
RubyGems	pathutil	`0.16.2`	indirect
RubyGems	public_suffix	`7.0.5`	indirect
RubyGems	rake	`13.4.2`	indirect
RubyGems	rb-fsevent	`0.11.2`	indirect
RubyGems	rb-inotify	`0.11.1`	indirect
RubyGems	rexml	`3.4.4`	indirect
RubyGems	rouge	`4.7.0`	indirect
RubyGems	safe_yaml	`1.0.5`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-aarch64-linux-android`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-arm-linux-androideabi`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-arm-linux-gnueabihf`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-arm-linux-musleabihf`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-riscv64-linux-android`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-riscv64-linux-gnu`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-riscv64-linux-musl`	indirect
RubyGems	sass-embedded	`1.103.1-x86_64-linux-android`	indirect
RubyGems	terminal-table	`3.0.2`	indirect
RubyGems	unicode-display_width	`2.6.0`	indirect
RubyGems	webrick	`1.9.2`	indirect

Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 110 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

Package	Version	Relation	Severity	Advisories	Fixed in
golang.org/x/crypto	`v0.54.0`	indirect	unknown	4	`0.56.0`

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records