Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 18:49 UTC

sowoi / check-opencloud-security

Scanner for OpenCloud Security status

Python · HTMLGPL-3.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Aug 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined
#icinga#icinga-plugin#icinga2#icinga2-plugin#nagios#nagios-checks#nagios-plugin#nagios-plugins#opencloud#security-scanner#compliance#hardening#monitoring-plugin#prometheus#prometheus-exporter#uptime-kuma#vulnerability-scanner#opencloud-security

sowoi/check-opencloud-security holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (81/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (43/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Massoud AhmedPersonal account
3 followers18 public repossince Dec 2014

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
PyPIcheck-opencloud-security1.23.1-550 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

71Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

58Moderate
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
3.5/36Commit cadence — 5/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 328 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_year328
human_commit_share0.87
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year5

Release discipline

90Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 55 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count55
latest_release_tagv1.23.1
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases0.4

Community & Adoption

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

43Weak · 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

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (GPL-3.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com
has_pull_request_templateyes

Sustainability & Governance

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

50Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

10Critical
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
1.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 1 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled1
top_contributor_share1

Issue & PR responsiveness

65Good
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolution — no issues or no data
29.2/30PR acceptance — 73/75 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs73
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d16
prs_decided_7d17
prs_merged_30d52
prs_decided_30d53
issue_closed_ratio—
closed_unmerged_prs2
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.

Ownership & stewardship

44Weak
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
4.3/25Owner reach — 3 followers of sowoi
21.3/25Track record — 18 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers3
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginsowoi
public_repos18
account_age_days4,286
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 55 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescheck-opencloud-security
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

81Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

68Good
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 23 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://scan.okxo.de
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 18 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsicinga, icinga-plugin, icinga2, icinga2-plugin, nagios, nagios-checks, nagios-plugin, nagios-plugins, opencloud, security-scanner, compliance, hardening, monitoring-plugin, prometheus, prometheus-exporter, uptime-kuma, vulnerability-scanner, opencloud-security
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://scan.okxo.de
docs_sitehttps://scan.okxo.de
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

45Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

45Weak
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
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 5 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributors — project has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
0/10Dangerous-Workflow — no data
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not 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
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — no data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Token-Permissions. 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.

77Good · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, tests/CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt present
40/40Legible commit history — 83 of 87 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.954
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, tests/CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes52,744

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

76Good
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — noxfile.py
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — mypy.ini
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 64 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
5/8Automated maintenance — dependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesnoxfile.py
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configsmypy.ini
agent_commit_share0.64
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

79Good
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (mypy.ini)
52.2/55Manageable file sizes — 11/215 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes318,578
source_files_sampled215
oversized_source_files11

Machine-readable interfaces

33At Risk
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
20/20MCP server
0/40Runnable examples
Inputs used
example_dirs—
has_mcp_signalyes
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto). Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

0GitHub stars
1contributors
328commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
55releases
1bus factor
0open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • pypi download statistics for 'check-opencloud-security' unavailable this scan (stats endpoint failed after retries); adoption may be under-evidenced
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:check-opencloud-security@1.23.1; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead
  • OSV advisory lookup failed: [Errno 101] Network is unreachable

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.5 / 10
4.5aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 18:49 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
10CI-Tests5 out of 5 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 0/9 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 4
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIcertifi>=2026.7.22pyproject.toml
PyPIrequests>=2.34.2pyproject.toml
PyPItypes-requests>=2.33.0.20260712pyproject.toml
PyPIPyYAML>=6.0.3pyproject.toml
All dependencies 107

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 103 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIcertifi2026.7.22direct
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3direct
PyPIrequests2.34.2direct
PyPItypes-requests2.33.0.20260712direct
PyPIannotated-doc0.0.5indirect
PyPIannotated-types0.8.0indirect
PyPIanyio4.14.2indirect
PyPIargcomplete3.7.2indirect
PyPIarq0.28.0indirect
PyPIast-serialize0.8.0indirect
PyPIasync-timeout5.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbuild1.6.0indirect
PyPIcffi2.1.1indirect
PyPIcharset-normalizer3.5.1indirect
PyPIcheck-opencloud-security1.23.1indirect
PyPIclick8.5.0indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcolorlog6.12.0indirect
PyPIcoverage7.16.0indirect
PyPIcryptography50.0.1indirect
PyPIdependency-groups1.3.2indirect
PyPIdistlib0.4.3indirect
PyPIdnspython2.8.0indirect
PyPIemail-validator2.3.0indirect
PyPIexceptiongroup1.3.1indirect
PyPIfastapi0.141.1indirect
PyPIfilelock3.32.5indirect
PyPIh110.16.0indirect
PyPIhatchling1.32.0indirect
PyPIhiredis3.4.1indirect
PyPIhttpcore1.0.9indirect
PyPIhttpcore22.12.0indirect
PyPIhttpx0.28.1indirect
PyPIhttpx22.12.0indirect
PyPIhttpx2-jsfetch1.0indirect
PyPIhumanize4.16.0indirect
PyPIid1.6.1indirect
PyPIidna3.19indirect
PyPIimportlib-metadata9.0.1indirect
PyPIimportlib-resources5.13.0indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-path0.5.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIlazy-object-proxy1.12.0indirect
PyPIlibrt0.15.0indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10.3indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.2.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImcp2.1.1indirect
PyPImcp-types2.1.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImypy2.3.1indirect
PyPImypy-extensions1.1.0indirect
PyPInox2026.8.17indirect
PyPIopenapi-schema-validator0.9.0indirect
PyPIopenapi-spec-validator0.9.0indirect
PyPIopentelemetry-api1.44.0indirect
PyPIpackaging26.3indirect
PyPIpathable0.6.0indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.11.6indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIpyasn10.6.4indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpydantic2.13.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-core2.46.5indirect
PyPIpydantic-settings2.15.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.21.0indirect
PyPIpyjwt2.13.0indirect
PyPIpyopenssl26.4.0indirect
PyPIpyproject-hooks1.2.0indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIpytest-mock3.15.1indirect
PyPIpython-discovery1.6.0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.3indirect
PyPIpython-multipart0.0.32indirect
PyPIpywin32312indirect
PyPIredis5.3.1indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrfc3161-client1.0.8indirect
PyPIrfc3339-validator0.1.4indirect
PyPIrfc87850.1.4indirect
PyPIrich15.0.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py2026.6.3indirect
PyPIsecuresystemslib1.5.1indirect
PyPIsigstore4.5.0indirect
PyPIsigstore-models0.0.6indirect
PyPIsigstore-rekor-types0.0.18indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsse-starlette3.4.8indirect
PyPIstarlette1.6.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItomlkit0.15.1indirect
PyPItrove-classifiers2026.6.1.19indirect
PyPItruststore0.10.4indirect
PyPItuf7.0.0indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.16.0indirect
PyPItyping-inspection0.4.4indirect
PyPIurllib32.7.0indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.52.4indirect
PyPIvirtualenv21.7.7indirect
PyPIzipp4.1.0indirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: OSV advisory lookup failed: [Errno 101] Network is unreachable

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 sowoi/check-opencloud-security. Read them side by side →

75matteocorti/check_ssl_certA shell script (that can be used as a Nagios/Icinga plugin) to check an SSL/TLS connection.Good99prowler-cloud/prowlerProwler is the world’s most widely used open-source cloud security platform that automates security and compliance across any cloud environment.Exceptional91OWASP/openshieldOpen source CSPM for Azure - scan for misconfigurations and quantum-unsafe cryptography, map findings to CIS/NIST/ISO27001/SOC2, and fix them with one commandExcellent88albertodonato/query-exporterExport Prometheus metrics from SQL queriesExcellent86XuehaiPan/nvitopAn interactive NVIDIA-GPU process viewer and beyond, the one-stop solution for GPU process management.Excellent84cpeoples/ansible-security-scanner🛡️ Static security scanner (SAST) for Ansible playbooks, roles, and collections. 1,000+ rules across 30+ categories detecting malicious code, RCE, hardcoded credentials, and supply-chain risk. Outputs SARIF, CycloneDX SBOM, and GitLab SAST. SLSA Build Level 3, Sigstore-signed.Excellent

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 — PyPI.