Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-06 03:08 UTC

ventoy / Ventoy

A new bootable USB solution.

CGPL-3.0★ 79,159 stars⑂ 4,923 forkssince Mar 2020View on GitHub ↗

ventoy/Ventoy holds a health index of 63 out of 100, placing it in the Moderate band. It scores highest on Vitality (77/100) and lowest on Security (31/100). It was last updated 30 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

63
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.

63
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 59 is calibrated to 63 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

longpandaPersonal account
4,107 followers22 public repossince Jan 2020

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?

77Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recencylast push 30 days ago
11.1/36Commit cadence16/52 weeks with commits
17.8/18Commit volume94 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year94
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push30
active_weeks_last_year16
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases100 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 43 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~25.3 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count100
latest_release_tagv1.1.17
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release43
mean_days_between_releases25.3

Community & Adoption

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

77Good · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

100Exceptional
How it's scored
60/60Stars79,159 stars
25/25Forks4,923 forks
15/15Watchers698 watchers
Inputs used
forks4,923
stars79,159
watchers698
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (GPL-3.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

54Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
5.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 77% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.772
How it's scored
28.6/42Issue resolution68% of issues closed
19/30PR acceptance302/476 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
1.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
Inputs used
merged_prs302
open_issues903
closed_issues1,938
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d1
issue_closed_ratio0.682
closed_unmerged_prs174
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
25/25Owner reach4,107 followers of ventoy
21.9/25Track record22 public repos, account ~6 yr old
Inputs used
followers4,107
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginventoy
public_repos22
account_age_days2,437
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

57Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
4/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests1 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://www.ventoy.net
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics18 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsbootable-usb, multiboot, uefi, legacy, iso-files, usb, secure-boot, windows, linux, unix, chromeos, persistence, unattended, auto-install, bsd, arm64, x86, x86-64
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://www.ventoy.net
docs_sitehttps://www.ventoy.net
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

31At Risk · 16% of overall
How it's scored
0/7.5Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0/7.5Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
0.5/2.5CI-Tests1 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
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 1 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-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate3.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Packaging. 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.

45Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
23.5/40Legible commit history44 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.44
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapLinuxGUI/Ventoy2Disk/Lib/xz-embedded/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, LinuxGUI/Ventoy2Disk/QT/build/Makefile, Plugson/src/Lib/xz-embedded/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, SQUASHFS/squashfs-tools-4.4/kernel/kernel-2.4/fs/squashfs/Makefile, SQUASHFS/squashfs-tools-4.4/kernel/kernel-2.6/fs/squashfs/Makefile, SQUASHFS/squashfs-tools-4.4/squashfs-tools/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/10.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/11.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/12.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/13.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/14.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/15.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/9.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, VBLADE/vblade-master/makefile, Ventoy2Disk/Ventoy2Disk/xz-embedded-20130513/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, Ventoy2Disk/Ventoy2Disk/xz-embedded-20130513/userspace/Makefile, vtoyjump/vtoyjump/xz-embedded-20130513/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, vtoyjump/vtoyjump/xz-embedded-20130513/userspace/Makefile, wimboot/wimboot-2.7.3/src/Makefile
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingC (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environmentDockerfile
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_testsno
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesLinuxGUI/Ventoy2Disk/Lib/xz-embedded/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, LinuxGUI/Ventoy2Disk/QT/build/Makefile, Plugson/src/Lib/xz-embedded/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, SQUASHFS/squashfs-tools-4.4/kernel/kernel-2.4/fs/squashfs/Makefile, SQUASHFS/squashfs-tools-4.4/kernel/kernel-2.6/fs/squashfs/Makefile, SQUASHFS/squashfs-tools-4.4/squashfs-tools/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/10.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/11.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/12.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/13.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/14.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/15.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, Unix/ventoy_unix_src/FreeBSD/geom_ventoy_src/9.x/sys/modules/geom/geom_ventoy/Makefile, VBLADE/vblade-master/makefile, Ventoy2Disk/Ventoy2Disk/xz-embedded-20130513/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, Ventoy2Disk/Ventoy2Disk/xz-embedded-20130513/userspace/Makefile, vtoyjump/vtoyjump/xz-embedded-20130513/linux/lib/xz/Makefile, vtoyjump/vtoyjump/xz-embedded-20130513/userspace/Makefile, wimboot/wimboot-2.7.3/src/Makefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0.01
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeC (statically typed)
53.2/55Manageable file sizes25/759 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC
largest_source_bytes768,603
source_files_sampled759
oversized_source_files25

Key facts

79,159GitHub stars
100contributors
94commits, last 12 months
30days since last push
100releases
1bus factor
903open issues
package ecosystems

Data collection warnings

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

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 4,923 ⇿
0Stars
4,923Forks
18Releases

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.

Only the most recent history is shown — this repository exceeds the collection window, so the earliest history is not captured.

3,5004,0004,5005,0004,923152025-012025-112026-09
Major 0Minor 1Patch 17

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.1 / 10
3.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-06 03:08 UTC

0Binary-Artifactsbinaries present in source code
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
2CI-Tests1 out of 5 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 2
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1Code-ReviewFound 5/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10Contributorsproject has 14 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 1 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
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
All dependencies 0

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 0 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Dependency advisories not assessed

Advisory matching could not run for this report: No resolved dependencies to assess

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.