Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-22 17:28 UTC

stalwartlabs / dns-update

Dynamic DNS update library for Rust

RustApache-2.0★ 46 stars⑂ 46 forkssince Apr 2024View on GitHub ↗

stalwartlabs/dns-update holds a health index of 71 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (74/100) and lowest on Security (47/100). It was last updated 14 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

71
overall / 100
Good

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.

71
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 63 is calibrated to 71 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Stalwart LabsOrganization · verified domain
944 followers28 public repossince Dec 2020

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iodns-update0.5.617,3092514 days agodnsdynamicrfc2136updatenetwork-programming

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

74Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 14 days ago
17.3/36Commit cadence25/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume124 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year124
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push14
active_weeks_last_year25
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases2 releases published
27/36Release recencylatest release 127 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~275.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count2
latest_release_tagv0.2.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release127
mean_days_between_releases275.1
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?

57Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
26.8/60Stars46 stars
13.8/25Forks46 forks
0/15Watchers1 watchers
Inputs used
forks46
stars46
watchers1
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges3
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
56.5/80Monthly downloads17,309 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesdns-update
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads95,687
monthly_downloads17,309
unverified_packages_excluded
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

73Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 73% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth26 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled26
top_contributor_share0.734
How it's scored
35.5/42Issue resolution85% of issues closed
23.9/30PR acceptance35/44 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance2/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs35
open_issues6
closed_issues33
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d2
prs_decided_30d2
issue_closed_ratio0.846
closed_unmerged_prs9
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d2
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
20/20Verified domain
21.4/25Owner reach944 followers of stalwartlabs
22/25Track record28 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers944
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginstalwartlabs
public_repos28
account_age_days2,065

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 14 days ago
20/20Version history25 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesdns-update
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish14

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

59Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows1 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 9 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
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/dns-update
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsdns, dynamic, rfc2136, update
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://docs.rs/dns-update
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/dns-update
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

47Weak · 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
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
1.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
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 3 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
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate4.7
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.

61Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
11.2/40Legible commit history21 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.21
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes15,899
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
4/10Demonstrated agent practice2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
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_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
54.3/55Manageable file sizes2/152 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes78,212
source_files_sampled152
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

46GitHub stars
26contributors
124commits, last 12 months
14days since last push
2releases
1bus factor
6open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 46 ⇿
0Stars
46Forks
2Releases

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.

010203040504632024-052025-072026-08
Major 0Minor 1Patch 1

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10
4.7aggregate

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 · 2026-08-22 17:28 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0CI-Tests0 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 9/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 3 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
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 14
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iobase640.23Cargo.toml
crates.iotokio1.52Cargo.toml
crates.iohex0.4.3Cargo.toml
crates.iohickory-net0.26.1Cargo.toml
crates.iohickory-proto0.26.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0.197Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0.116Cargo.toml
crates.ioreqwest0.13Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_urlencoded0.7.1Cargo.toml
crates.ioring0.17Cargo.toml
crates.ioaws-lc-rs1.17Cargo.toml
crates.iorustls0.23Cargo.toml
crates.ioquick-xml0.41Cargo.toml
crates.iochrono0.4Cargo.toml
All dependencies 16

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 14 direct and 2 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioaws-lc-rsdirect
crates.iobase64direct
crates.iochronodirect
crates.iohexdirect
crates.iohickory-netdirect
crates.iohickory-protodirect
crates.ioquick-xmldirect
crates.ioreqwestdirect
crates.ioringdirect
crates.iorustlsdirect
crates.ioserdedirect
crates.ioserde_jsondirect
crates.ioserde_urlencodeddirect
crates.iotokiodirect
crates.iohttpmockindirect
crates.iomockitoindirect
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies carried a version and a supported ecosystem

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 statisticscrates.io.