Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-06 13:17 UTC

sventorben / keycloak-home-idp-discovery

Keycloak: Home IdP Discovery - discover home identity provider or realm by email domain

JavaMIT★ 341 stars⑂ 63 forkssince Nov 2021View on GitHub ↗

sventorben/keycloak-home-idp-discovery holds a health index of 77 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (79/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (50/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

77
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.

77
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 66 is calibrated to 77 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Sven-Torben JanusPersonal account
93 followers43 public repossince Apr 2015Conciso GmbH (@conciso)

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

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

79Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
12.5/36Commit cadence18/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume103 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_year103
human_commit_share0.4
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year18
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases30 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 18 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~88.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count30
latest_release_tagv26.2.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release18
mean_days_between_releases88.3

Community & Adoption

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

65Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
41.1/60Stars341 stars
14.9/25Forks63 forks
3.9/15Watchers6 watchers
Inputs used
forks63
stars341
watchers6
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
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
4.2/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 81% of commits
4.1/13.5Contributor breadth3 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled3
top_contributor_share0.814
How it's scored
34.6/42Issue resolution82% of issues closed
21/30PR acceptance387/554 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
4.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 8/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
merged_prs387
open_issues13
closed_issues61
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d7
prs_decided_30d7
issue_closed_ratio0.824
closed_unmerged_prs167
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
14.2/25Owner reach93 followers of sventorben
24/25Track record43 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers93
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginsventorben
public_repos43
account_age_days4,116
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

78Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://sventorben.github.io/keycloak-home-idp-discovery/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics10 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicskeycloak, keycloak-provider, keycloak-authenticator, realm, email, discovery, authentication, keycloak-extension, keycloak-server, domain
has_wikino
homepagehttps://sventorben.github.io/keycloak-home-idp-discovery/
docs_sitehttps://sventorben.github.io/keycloak-home-idp-discovery/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

60Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2/2.5CI-Tests8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
2.2/7.5Code-ReviewFound 8/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
4.5/5SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities35 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated16
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive2
scorecard_aggregate5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories1
affected_packages1
assessed_packages25
unassessed_packages2
affected_by_severityhigh 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 25 resolved dependencies against OSV. 2 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.

59Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
32/40Legible commit history24 of 40 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.6
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrappom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance60 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0.6
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes0/57 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes21,670
source_files_sampled57
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

341GitHub stars
3contributors
103commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
30releases
1bus factor
13open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Could not fetch maven package 'de.sventorben.keycloak:keycloak-home-idp-discovery' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 63 ⇿
0Stars
63Forks
27Releases

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.

013253850636122021-122024-032026-06
Major 10Minor 8Patch 9

Each point covers 5 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.0 / 10
5.0aggregate

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 · 2026-08-06 13:16 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
8CI-Tests8 out of 9 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3Code-ReviewFound 8/26 approved changesets -- score normalized to 3
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate 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
9SASTSAST tool detected but not run on all commits
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
0Vulnerabilities35 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 2
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.junit:junit-bom6.1.2pom.xml
Mavenio.opentelemetry:opentelemetry-bom1.64.0pom.xml
All dependencies 27

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 2 direct and 25 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavenio.opentelemetry:opentelemetry-bom1.64.0direct
Mavenorg.junit:junit-bom6.1.2direct
Mavencom.github.dasniko:testcontainers-keycloak4.3.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-core2.26.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-slf4j2-impl2.26.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.15.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-deploy-plugin3.1.4indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-failsafe-plugin3.5.6indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin3.5.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-release-plugin3.3.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.4.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.5.6indirect
Mavenorg.assertj:assertj-core3.27.7indirect
Mavenorg.cyclonedx:cyclonedx-maven-plugin2.9.3indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-apiindirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-paramsindirect
Mavenorg.keycloak:keycloak-admin-client26.0.11indirect
Mavenorg.keycloak:keycloak-core26.7.0indirect
Mavenorg.keycloak:keycloak-server-spi26.7.0indirect
Mavenorg.keycloak:keycloak-server-spi-private26.7.0indirect
Mavenorg.keycloak:keycloak-services26.7.0indirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-core5.23.0indirect
Mavenorg.mockito:mockito-junit-jupiter5.23.0indirect
Mavenorg.seleniumhq.selenium:selenium-chrome-driver4.46.0indirect
Mavenorg.seleniumhq.selenium:selenium-support4.46.0indirect
Mavenorg.testcontainers:junit-jupiter1.21.4indirect
Mavenorg.testcontainers:selenium1.21.4indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 25 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 2 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
org.keycloak:keycloak-services26.7.0indirecthigh1

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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