Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-19 14:34 UTC

ublk-org / libublk-rs

Rust libublk

RustApache-2.0★ 57 stars⑂ 16 forkssince Jun 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryApplicationhow this is determined

ublk-org/libublk-rs holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (78/100) and lowest on Security (41/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

67
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.

67
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 61 is calibrated to 67 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

ublkOrganization
13 followers6 public repossince Nov 2023

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iolibublk0.4.754,332204 days agoblockio-uringstorageublkuserspaceasynchronousfilesystem
crates.iolibublk-rs-sys0.1.16,32024 days agobindingsblockffiublkuserspaceexternal-ffi-bindings

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

78Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
13.2/36Commit cadence19/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume200 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_year200
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year19
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases20 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recencylatest release 4 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~66.4 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count20
latest_release_tagv0.4.7
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release4
mean_days_between_releases66.4
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?

54Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
28.4/60Stars57 stars
9.8/25Forks16 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks16
stars57
watchers5
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
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges2
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
63.8/80Monthly downloads60,652 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packageslibublk, libublk-rs-sys
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads307,956
monthly_downloads60,652
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?

57Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.3/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 99% of commits
9.5/13.5Contributor breadth7 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled7
top_contributor_share0.987
How it's scored
28/42Issue resolution67% of issues closed
28/30PR acceptance41/44 decided PRs merged
6.5/13Newcomer PR acceptance1/2 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 3/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs41
open_issues6
closed_issues12
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d1
prs_merged_30d5
prs_decided_30d6
issue_closed_ratio0.667
closed_unmerged_prs3
first_time_authors_30d2
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d2
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
8.2/25Owner reach13 followers of ublk-org
11.7/25Track record6 public repos, account ~2 yr old
Inputs used
followers13
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginublk-org
public_repos6
account_age_days1,021
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable2 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 4 days ago
20/20Version history20 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageslibublk, libublk-rs-sys
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish4

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

68Good · 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
16/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests7 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
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/libublk
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsblock, iouring, linux, rust, ublk
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/libublk
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

41Weak · 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
2/2.5CI-Tests7 out of 8 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
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 3/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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
0/5Security-Policysecurity policy file not 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_aggregate4.1
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.

74Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionsCLAUDE.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history90 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.9
agent_instruction_filesCLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes7,088
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrapCargo.toml, libublk-rs-sys/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingRust (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
2/10Demonstrated agent practice1 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_share0.01
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml, libublk-rs-sys/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeRust (statically typed)
49.2/55Manageable file sizes2/19 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes115,581
source_files_sampled19
oversized_source_files2
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

57GitHub stars
7contributors
200commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
20releases
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 ★ / 16 ⇿
0Stars
16Forks
19Releases

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.

03581013151512023-072025-012026-07
Major 0Minor 4Patch 15

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.1 / 10
4.1aggregate

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 · 2026-08-19 14:34 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
8CI-Tests7 out of 8 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 8
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 3/17 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
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
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 15
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iolibublk-rs-sys0.1.1Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0.99Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0.79Cargo.toml
crates.iobitmaps3.2.0Cargo.toml
crates.iolog0.4Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror1.0.43Cargo.toml
crates.iosmol2.0.2Cargo.toml
crates.ioslab0.4.9Cargo.toml
crates.ioderive_setters0.1Cargo.toml
crates.iobitflags2.4.1Cargo.toml
crates.iofutures-timer3.0Cargo.toml
crates.ioasync-lock3.0Cargo.toml
crates.iolibc0.2libublk-rs-sys/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde1.0.99libublk-rs-sys/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 26

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 13 direct and 13 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.ioasync-lockdirect
crates.iobitflagsdirect
crates.iobitmapsdirect
crates.ioderive_settersdirect
crates.iofutures-timerdirect
crates.iolibcdirect
crates.iolibublk-rs-sysdirect
crates.iologdirect
crates.ioserdedirect
crates.ioserde_jsondirect
crates.ioslabdirect
crates.iosmoldirect
crates.iothiserrordirect
crates.ioanyhowindirect
crates.iobindgenindirect
crates.ioclapindirect
crates.ioctorindirect
crates.iodaemonizeindirect
crates.ioenv_loggerindirect
crates.iofuturesindirect
crates.ioilogindirect
crates.ioio-uringindirect
crates.ionixindirect
crates.iorandindirect
crates.ioregexindirect
crates.iotempfileindirect
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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticscrates.io.