Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-15 05:04 UTC

vezel-dev / ruptura

A Windows DLL injection, function interception, and memory manipulation library for .NET.

C#0BSD★ 54 stars⑂ 3 forkssince Jun 2022archivedView on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryDesktop applicationhow this is determined

vezel-dev/ruptura holds a health index of 19 out of 100, placing it in the Critical band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (66/100) and lowest on Vitality (39/100). The repository is archived, so no further maintenance is expected.

19
overall / 100
Critical

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.

19
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 56 is calibrated to 59 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

VezelOrganization · verified domain
49 followers7 public repossince Jul 2021

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
NuGetVezel.Ruptura.Common2.1.8-5541 days ago
NuGetVezel.Ruptura.Memory2.1.8-7541 days ago
NuGetVezel.Ruptura.System2.1.8-7541 days ago
NuGetVezel.Ruptura.Hosting2.1.8-7541 days ago
NuGetVezel.Ruptura.Injection2.1.8-7541 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

39Weak · 21% of overall
How it's scored
18/36Push recency — last push 31 days ago
6.5/36Commit cadence — 25/52 weeks with commits, discounted for automation: 15 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 426 days
5.5/18Commit volume — 41 commits in the last year, discounted for automation: 15 of the last 100 commits human-authored, spanning 426 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project is archived
Inputs used
commits_last_year41
human_commit_share0.15
days_since_last_push31
active_weeks_last_year25
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 7 releases published
7.2/36Release recency — latest release 541 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~163.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv2.1.8
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release541
mean_days_between_releases163.8
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?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
28/60Stars — 54 stars
2.5/25Forks — 3 forks
0/15Watchers — 2 watchers
Inputs used
forks3
stars54
watchers2
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

85Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (0BSD)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges6
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
54.1/80Total downloads — 159,600 downloads all-time across nuget
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesVezel.Ruptura.Common, Vezel.Ruptura.Memory, Vezel.Ruptura.System, Vezel.Ruptura.Hosting, Vezel.Ruptura.Injection
dependents—
ecosystemsnuget
total_downloads159,600
monthly_downloads—
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?

58Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 100% of commits
2.7/13.5Contributor breadth — 2 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled2
top_contributor_share0.998
How it's scored
22.7/42Issue resolution — 54% of issues closed
24.3/30PR acceptance — 193/238 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs193
open_issues23
closed_issues27
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.54
closed_unmerged_prs45
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, OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
12.2/25Owner reach — 49 followers of vezel-dev
16.9/25Track record — 7 public repos, account ~5 yr old
Inputs used
followers49
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginvezel-dev
public_repos7
account_age_days1,880
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 5 package(s) on nuget
14/35Publish recency — latest publish 541 days ago
20/20Version history — 7 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesVezel.Ruptura.Common, Vezel.Ruptura.Memory, Vezel.Ruptura.System, Vezel.Ruptura.Hosting, Vezel.Ruptura.Injection
ecosystemsnuget
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish541

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

66Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
0/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsno
has_editorconfigyes
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://docs.vezel.dev/ruptura
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 6 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsc, csharp, dotnet, hooking, injection, modding
has_wikino
homepagehttps://docs.vezel.dev/ruptura
docs_sitehttps://docs.vezel.dev/ruptura
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

61Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
6/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — no data
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — project is archived
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
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 — 11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Code-Review, 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
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories11
affected_packages4
assessed_packages80
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 3, moderate 1
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 80 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. 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.

54Moderate · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.vezel.dev/llms.txt)
0/40Legible commit history — no data
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.vezel.dev/llms.txt
legible_history_share—
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Legible commit history. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrap — src/analyzers/analyzers.csproj, src/common/common.csproj, src/hosting/hosting.csproj (toolchain convention, no task runner)
0/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — C# (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
8/8Automated maintenance — 85 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsno
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestssrc/analyzers/analyzers.csproj, src/common/common.csproj, src/hosting/hosting.csproj, src/injection/injection.csproj, src/memory/memory.csproj, src/samples/attach/attach.csproj, src/samples/fdd/fdd.csproj, src/samples/hooking/hooking.csproj, src/samples/suspension/suspension.csproj, src/samples/trace/trace.csproj, src/system/system.csproj, src/trimming/trimming.csproj
dependency_bot_commit_share0.85
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — C# (statically typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/71 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageC#
largest_source_bytes16,526
source_files_sampled71
oversized_source_files0
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — samples
Inputs used
example_dirssamples
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

54GitHub stars
2contributors
41commits, last 12 months
31days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
23open 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 ★ / 3 ⇿
0Stars
3Forks
4Releases

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.

12233312023-042024-052025-06
Major 0Minor 0Patch 4

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.1 / 10
5.1aggregate

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 · 2026-09-15 05:04 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
8Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
n/aCode-ReviewFound no human activity in the last 30 changesets
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject is archived
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
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
0Vulnerabilities11 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
NuGetMicrosoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp—src/analyzers/analyzers.csproj
NuGetIced—src/injection/injection.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Windows.CsWin32—src/injection/injection.csproj
NuGetPeNet—src/injection/injection.csproj
NuGetIced—src/memory/memory.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Windows.CsWin32—src/memory/memory.csproj
NuGetMicrosoft.Windows.CsWin32—src/system/system.csproj
All dependencies 80

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 80 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npm@nodelib/fs.scandir2.1.5indirect
npm@nodelib/fs.stat2.0.5indirect
npm@nodelib/fs.walk1.2.8indirect
npm@sindresorhus/merge-streams2.3.0indirect
npm@types/debug4.1.12indirect
npm@types/katex0.16.7indirect
npm@types/ms2.1.0indirect
npm@types/unist2.0.11indirect
npmargparse2.0.1indirect
npmbraces3.0.3indirect
npmcharacter-entities2.0.2indirect
npmcharacter-entities-legacy3.0.0indirect
npmcharacter-reference-invalid2.0.1indirect
npmcommander8.3.0indirect
npmdebug4.4.0indirect
npmdecode-named-character-reference1.1.0indirect
npmdequal2.0.3indirect
npmdevlop1.1.0indirect
npmentities4.5.0indirect
npmfast-glob3.3.3indirect
npmfastq1.19.1indirect
npmfill-range7.1.1indirect
npmglob-parent5.1.2indirect
npmglobby14.1.0indirect
npmignore7.0.4indirect
npmis-alphabetical2.0.1indirect
npmis-alphanumerical2.0.1indirect
npmis-decimal2.0.1indirect
npmis-extglob2.1.1indirect
npmis-glob4.0.3indirect
npmis-hexadecimal2.0.1indirect
npmis-number7.0.0indirect
npmjs-yaml4.1.0indirect
npmjsonc-parser3.3.1indirect
npmkatex0.16.22indirect
npmlinkify-it5.0.0indirect
npmmarkdown-it14.1.0indirect
npmmarkdownlint0.38.0indirect
npmmarkdownlint-cli20.18.1indirect
npmmarkdownlint-cli2-formatter-default0.0.5indirect
npmmdurl2.0.0indirect
npmmerge21.4.1indirect
npmmicromark4.0.2indirect
npmmicromark-core-commonmark2.0.3indirect
npmmicromark-extension-directive4.0.0indirect
npmmicromark-extension-gfm-autolink-literal2.1.0indirect
npmmicromark-extension-gfm-footnote2.1.0indirect
npmmicromark-extension-gfm-table2.1.1indirect
npmmicromark-extension-math3.1.0indirect
npmmicromark-factory-destination2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-factory-label2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-factory-space2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-factory-title2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-factory-whitespace2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-character2.1.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-chunked2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-classify-character2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-combine-extensions2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-decode-numeric-character-reference2.0.2indirect
npmmicromark-util-encode2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-html-tag-name2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-normalize-identifier2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-resolve-all2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-sanitize-uri2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-subtokenize2.1.0indirect
npmmicromark-util-symbol2.0.1indirect
npmmicromark-util-types2.0.2indirect
npmmicromatch4.0.8indirect
npmms2.1.3indirect
npmparse-entities4.0.2indirect
npmpath-type6.0.0indirect
npmpicomatch2.3.1indirect
npmpunycode.js2.3.1indirect
npmqueue-microtask1.2.3indirect
npmreusify1.1.0indirect
npmrun-parallel1.2.0indirect
npmslash5.1.0indirect
npmto-regex-range5.0.1indirect
npmuc.micro2.1.0indirect
npmunicorn-magic0.3.0indirect
Dependency advisories 4

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 80 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 4 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
js-yaml4.1.0indirecthigh54.3.2
linkify-it5.0.0indirecthigh25.0.2
picomatch2.3.1indirecthigh24.0.4
markdown-it14.1.0indirectmoderate214.2.0

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 — NuGet.