# trimble-oss/tierceron — health index 69/100 (Moderate)

> Inspection of the public repository trimble-oss/tierceron by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 69 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/trimble-oss/tierceron
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/trimble-oss/tierceron
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/trimble-oss/tierceron/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/t/trimble-oss/tierceron.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-19
- Methodology: metrics 1.13.0, report schema 0.14.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 22% | 98/100 | Excellent |
| Community & Adoption | 18% | 55/100 | Moderate |
| Sustainability & Governance | 24% | 69/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 20% | 45/100 | At risk |
| Security | 16% | 75/100 | Good |
| AI Readiness | not counted | 55/100 | Moderate |

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | Tierceron is a framework of services and tools for securely storing, managing (via tools, data flows, and services), distributing (via deployments to microservices), and visualizing secrets (via command line output and diff, database, and 3D visualization); powered by Go, Apache Kubernetes, Apache Dolthub, G3n, and HashiCorp Vault. |
| Primary language | Go |
| License | MIT |
| Stars | 18 |
| Forks | 6 |
| Created | 2022-03-17 |
| Last push | 2026-07-15 |
| Latest release | v1.58.2 |
| Commits (last year) | 371 |
| Bus factor | 1 |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| go | github.com/trimble-oss/tierceron | v1.58.2 | — |

## Vitality — 98/100 (Excellent)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 22% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 96/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 3 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 32.5 / 36 | 47/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 371 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | met | 10 / 10 | 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |

### Release discipline — 100/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 100 releases published |
| Release recency | met | 36 / 36 | latest release 3 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~4.1 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | no releases found |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | maintenance record not established from the collected data |

## Community & Adoption — 55/100 (Moderate)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 18% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 28/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 20 / 60 | 18 stars |
| Forks | partial | 5.8 / 25 | 6 forks |
| Watchers | partial | 1.7 / 15 | 3 watchers |

### Community health — 85/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (MIT) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

## Sustainability & Governance — 69/100 (Moderate)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 24% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 32/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 6.5 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 71% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | met | 13.5 / 13.5 | 11 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | partial | 3 / 10 | project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3 |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 86/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 34 / 46.8 | 73% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 37 / 38.2 | 1828/1889 decided PRs merged |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | met | 15 / 15 | all changesets reviewed |

### Ownership & stewardship — 73/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 18.8 / 25 | 417 followers of trimble-oss |
| Track record | partial | 24 / 25 | 73 public repos, account ~5 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 1 package(s) on go |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 9 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 641 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 45/100 (At risk)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 20% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 42/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | not met | 0 / 24 | — |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | not met | 0 / 16 | — |
| Pre-commit hooks | not met | 0 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | not met | 0 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | partial | 18 / 20 | 12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9 |

### Documentation — 50/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | not met | 0 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | not met | 0 / 10 | — |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 75/100 (Good)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 75/100 (Good)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Pinned-Dependencies, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binary-Artifacts | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | no binaries found in the repo |
| Branch-Protection | partial | 0.8 / 7.5 | branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches |
| CI-Tests | partial | 2.2 / 2.5 | 12 out of 13 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 9 |
| CII-Best-Practices | not met | 0 / 2.5 | no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected |
| Code-Review | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | all changesets reviewed |
| Contributors | partial | 0.8 / 2.5 | project has 1 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 3 |
| Dangerous-Workflow | excluded | 0 / 10 | no workflows found |
| Dependency-Update-Tool | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | update tool detected |
| Fuzzing | met | 5 / 5 | project is fuzzed |
| License | met | 2.5 / 2.5 | license file detected |
| Maintained | met | 7.5 / 7.5 | 30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10 |
| Packaging | excluded | 0 / 5 | packaging workflow not detected |
| Pinned-Dependencies | excluded | 0 / 5 | no dependencies found |
| SAST | met | 5 / 5 | SAST tool is run on all commits |
| Security-Policy | met | 5 / 5 | security policy file detected |
| Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | no releases found |
| Token-Permissions | excluded | 0 / 7.5 | No tokens found |
| Vulnerabilities | partial | 1.5 / 7.5 | 8 existing vulnerabilities detected |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Excellent)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 55/100 (Moderate)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? An independent, experimental badge — weight 0.0, so it is surfaced on its own and does not affect the overall health score.

### Agent context & guidance — 1/100 (Critical)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | not met | 0 / 45 | no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | excluded | 0 / 40 | no data |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 85/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Demonstrated agent practice, Automated maintenance, OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | met | 18 / 18 | Makefile, atrium/Makefile, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trcdb/Makefile, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trchealthcheck/Makefile, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trcprocurator/Makefile, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trcshtalk/Makefile, atrium/vestibulum/trcchatproxy/Makefile, installation/trclocal/trchelloworld/Makefile, installation/trcshhive/trcshk/echo/Makefile |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | not met | 0 / 11 | — |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | Go (statically typed) |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | Dockerfile, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | excluded | 0 / 10 | no data |
| Automated maintenance | excluded | 0 / 8 | no data |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | excluded | 0 / 10 | no dependencies found |

### Code legibility for models — 99/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Go (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 54.2 / 55 | 5/347 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 40/100 (At risk)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | met | 40 / 40 | atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trchealthcheck/hellosdk/hellosdk.proto, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trcmutabilis/mutabilissdk/mutabilissdk.proto, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trcpraevius/praeviussdk/praeviussdk.proto, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trcpraevius/target/swagger.json, atrium/vestibulum/hive/plugins/trcshtalk/trcshtalksdk/trcshtalksdk.proto, installation/trclocal/trchelloworld/hellosdk/hellosdk.proto, installation/trcshhive/trcshk/echo/trcshtalksdk/trcshtalksdk.proto, trcweb/rpc/apinator/service.proto |
| MCP server | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | not met | 0 / 40 | — |

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt