Public record
Software health reportschema 0.11.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-17 03:15 UTC

toxicwind / caddy

Fast and extensible multi-platform HTTP/1-2-3 web server with automatic HTTPS

GoApache-2.0★ 0 stars⑂ 0 forkssince Jul 2026forkView on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolhow this is determined

toxicwind/caddy holds a health index of 53 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (85/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (12/100). It was last updated 5 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

53
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.

53
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 52 is calibrated to 53 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

toxicwindPersonal account
3 followers189 public repossince Jul 2012

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
Gogithub.com/caddyserver/caddy/v2points to another repo — not scoredv2.11.4-10245 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

85Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 5 days ago
34.6/36Commit cadence50/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume331 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year331
human_commit_share
days_since_last_push5
active_weeks_last_year50
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases100 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 45 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~45.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv2.11.4
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release45
mean_days_between_releases45.5
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?

12Critical · 17% of overall
How it's scored
0/60Stars0 stars
0/25Forks0 forks
0/15Watchers0 watchers
Inputs used
forks0
stars0
watchers0
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeno
has_licenseno
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

32At Risk · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
10.8/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 52% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.519
How it's scored
0/42Issue resolutionno issues or no data
0/30PR acceptanceno decided pull requests or no data
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs0
open_issues0
closed_issues0
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Issue resolution, PR acceptance, Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backingpersonal (user) account
0/20Verified domainnot applicable to user accounts
4.3/25Owner reach3 followers of toxicwind
25/25Track record189 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers3
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_logintoxicwind
public_repos189
account_age_days5,123
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

100Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows9 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config.golangci.yml
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Testsno data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests. Remaining weights renormalized.

Documentation

15Critical
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://caddyserver.com
0/10Repository description
0/10Topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topics
has_wikino
homepagehttps://caddyserver.com
docs_sitehttps://caddyserver.com
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

59Moderate · 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-Testsno data
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
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
0/7.5Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
0/5Packagingno data
4/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0/5SASTno SAST tool detected
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
6.8/7.5Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): CI-Tests, 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.

79Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsAGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit historyno data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes8,091
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config.golangci.yml
11/11Static type checkingGo (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentlockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno data
5/8Automated maintenancedependency automation configured, none observed in the sampled commits
8/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesgo.sum
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeGo (statically typed)
54.5/55Manageable file sizes3/326 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageGo
largest_source_bytes157,791
source_files_sampled326
oversized_source_files3

Key facts

0GitHub stars
100contributors
331commits, last 12 months
5days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
0open issues
Gopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Community profile unavailable
  • go package 'github.com/caddyserver/caddy/v2' points at a different repository (https://github.com/caddyserver/caddy); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

More detail

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

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 · 2026-07-17 03:15 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
n/aCI-Testsno pull request found
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 38 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
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/aPackaginginternal error: Client.Actions.ListWorkflowRunsByFileName: internal error: ListWorkflowRunsByFileName: GET https://api.github.com/repos/toxicwind/caddy/actions/workflows/ci.yml/runs?status=success: 404 Not Found []
8Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 8
0SASTno SAST tool detected
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
9Vulnerabilities1 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 52
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Gogithub.com/BurntSushi/tomlv1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/DeRuina/timberjackv1.4.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/KimMachineGun/automemlimitv0.7.5go.mod
Gogithub.com/Masterminds/sprig/v3v3.3.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/alecthomas/chroma/v2v2.24.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/aryann/difflibv0.0.0-20210328193216-ff5ff6dc229bgo.mod
Gogithub.com/caddyserver/certmagicv0.25.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/caddyserver/zerosslv0.1.5go.mod
Gogithub.com/cloudflare/circlv1.6.3go.mod
Gogithub.com/dunglas/go-urlpatternv0.0.0-20260421141449-cbab7cf1e16dgo.mod
Gogithub.com/dustin/go-humanizev1.0.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/go-chi/chi/v5v5.2.5go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/cel-gov0.29.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/google/uuidv1.6.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/klauspost/compressv1.18.6go.mod
Gogithub.com/klauspost/cpuid/v2v2.3.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/mholt/acmez/v3v3.1.6go.mod
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_golangv1.23.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/quic-go/quic-gov0.59.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/smallstep/certificatesv0.30.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/smallstep/nosqlv0.8.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/smallstep/truststorev0.13.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/cobrav1.10.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/spf13/pflagv1.0.10go.mod
Gogithub.com/stretchr/testifyv1.11.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/tailscale/tscertv0.0.0-20251216020129-aea342f6d747go.mod
Gogithub.com/yuin/goldmarkv1.8.2go.mod
Gogithub.com/yuin/goldmark-highlighting/v2v2.0.0-20230729083705-37449abec8ccgo.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/contrib/bridges/prometheusv0.68.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/contrib/exporters/autoexportv0.68.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/contrib/instrumentation/net/http/otelhttpv0.68.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/contrib/propagators/autopropv0.68.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otelv1.43.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/sdkv1.43.0go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/sdk/metricv1.43.0go.mod
Gogo.step.sm/cryptov0.81.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/automaxprocsv1.6.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/zapv1.28.0go.mod
Gogo.uber.org/zap/expv0.3.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/cryptov0.52.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/crypto/x509roots/fallbackv0.0.0-20260213171211-a408498e5541go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/netv0.55.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/syncv0.20.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/termv0.43.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/timev0.15.0go.mod
Gogopkg.in/yaml.v3v3.0.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/cespare/xxhash/v2v2.3.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/libdns/libdnsv1.1.1go.mod
Gogithub.com/pires/go-proxyprotov0.12.0go.mod
Gogithub.com/prometheus/client_modelv0.6.2go.mod
Gogo.opentelemetry.io/otel/tracev1.43.0go.mod
Gogolang.org/x/sysv0.45.0go.mod
All dependencies not collected

The resolved dependency set could not be collected for this report: GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository

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 v0.11.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

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