Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 17:15 UTC

tiagozip / cap

Free, open-source and self-hosted CAPTCHA alternative to reCAPTCHA. Privacy-first and powered by proof-of-work and instrumentation challenges.

JavaScript · CSSCustom license★ 7,770 stars⑂ 573 forkssince Jan 2025View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryNetwork servicehow this is determined

tiagozip/cap holds a health index of 87 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (92/100) and lowest on Sustainability & Governance (57/100). It was last updated 11 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

87
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.

87
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 73 is calibrated to 87 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

tiagoPersonal account
254 followers15 public repossince Sep 2020

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

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

92Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 11 days ago
29.1/36Commit cadence — 42/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 283 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year283
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push11
active_weeks_last_year42

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 11 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~12.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagstandalone@3.1.11
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release11
mean_days_between_releases12.6
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?

75Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars — 7,770 stars
23/25Forks — 573 forks
7.7/15Watchers — 25 watchers
Inputs used
forks573
stars7,770
watchers25
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges1
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_serviceswww.bestpractices.dev
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
52.3/80Monthly downloads — 8,431 downloads/month across npm
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagescapjs-core
dependents—
ecosystemsnpm
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads8,431
unverified_packages_excludedcap-standalone
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.3/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 94% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 30 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled30
top_contributor_share0.941
How it's scored
40.8/42Issue resolution — 97% of issues closed
13.7/30PR acceptance — 36/79 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/3 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 2/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs36
open_issues6
closed_issues210
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d5
issue_closed_ratio0.972
closed_unmerged_prs43
first_time_authors_30d3
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d3
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
17.3/25Owner reach — 254 followers of tiagozip
20.8/25Track record — 15 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers254
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_logintiagozip
public_repos15
account_age_days2,203
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 2 package(s) on npm
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 41 days ago
12/20Version history — 3 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagescapjs-core, cap-standalone
ecosystemsnpm
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish41

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

80Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — biome.json
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://trycap.dev
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 8 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicscaptcha, javascript, proof-of-work, antispam, anti-abuse, anti-bot, defense, anti-scraper
has_wikino
homepagehttps://trycap.dev
docs_sitehttps://trycap.dev
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
6/7.5Binary-Artifacts — binaries present in source code
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.2/2.5CI-Tests — 1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: Gold
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 2/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 9 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packaging — no data
0/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
4.5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0/7.5Vulnerabilities — 66 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): Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages143
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the npm:capjs-core@0.1.2 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 143 packages. 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.

74Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — docs/public/agent.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://trycap.dev/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 94 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://trycap.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.94
agent_instruction_filesdocs/public/agent.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes7,499
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — wasm/src/rust/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — biome.json
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — Dockerfile, lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
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
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestswasm/src/rust/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — JavaScript without a type-check config
53.5/55Manageable file sizes — 2/72 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJavaScript
largest_source_bytes208,389
source_files_sampled72
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

7,770GitHub stars
30contributors
283commits, last 12 months
11days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
6open issues
npmpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 573 ⇿
0Stars
573Forks
100Releases

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.

0100200300400500600570312025-042025-122026-09
Major 0Minor 0Patch 0

Each point covers 2 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 · 2026-09-15 17:15 UTC

8Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
5CI-Tests1 out of 2 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
10CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: Gold
0Code-ReviewFound 2/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
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
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 9 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
9Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities66 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 10
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
npmesbuild^0.28.0core/package.json
npm@elysiajs/cors^1.4.1standalone/package.json
npm@elysiajs/swagger^1.3.1standalone/package.json
npmcapjs-core^0.1.2standalone/package.json
npmelysia^1.4.28standalone/package.json
npmmaxmind^5.0.6standalone/package.json
npmterser^5.43.1wasm/package.json
npmlightningcss^1.31.1widget/package.json
npmplaywright^1.52.0widget/package.json
npmterser^5.43.1widget/package.json
All dependencies 35

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 11 direct and 24 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@elysiajs/cors^1.4.1direct
npm@elysiajs/swagger^1.3.1direct
npmcapjs-core^0.1.0direct
npmcapjs-core^0.1.2direct
npmelysia^1.3.4direct
npmelysia^1.4.28direct
npmesbuild^0.28.0direct
npmlightningcss^1.31.1direct
npmmaxmind^5.0.6direct
npmplaywright^1.52.0direct
npmterser^5.43.1direct
crates.iobumpalo3.20.2indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.4indirect
crates.iolog0.4.29indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.4indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.106indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.45indirect
crates.iorustversion1.0.22indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.117indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.24indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2.100indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-backend0.2.100indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro0.2.100indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro-support0.2.100indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-shared0.2.100indirect
npm@cap.js/solver0.0.3indirect
npm@cap.js/widget^0.1.56indirect
npm@types/bunlatestindirect
npmbun-types^1.3.12indirect
npmjavascript-obfuscator^4.2.2indirect
npmkleur^4.1.5indirect
npmvitepress^1.6.4indirect
npmvitepress-plugin-llms^1.13.3indirect
npmvitepress-plugin-mermaid^2.0.17indirect
npmvue^3.5.39indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing npm:capjs-core@0.1.2 pulls in 143 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

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 statistics — npm.