Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-19 15:20 UTC

web-push-libs / vapid

Apps and Libraries to support WebPush VAPID

Python · JavaScript · RustMPL-2.0★ 97 stars⑂ 31 forkssince Apr 2016forkView on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryCommand-line toolhow this is determined

web-push-libs/vapid holds a health index of 36 out of 100, placing it in the Weak band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (64/100) and lowest on Engineering Quality (28/100). It was last updated 141 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

36
overall / 100
Weak

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.

36
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 41 is calibrated to 36 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

WebPush librariesOrganization
190 followers9 public repossince Jun 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIpy-vapidpoints to another repo — not scored1.9.46,975,64333225 days agopushvapidwebpush
crates.iovapid0.6.012811352 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

28At Risk · 21% of overall
How it's scored
9.9/36Push recencylast push 141 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence2/52 weeks with commits
5.4/18Commit volume3 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
commits_last_year3
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push141
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases12 releases published
0/36Release recencylatest release 1,947 days ago
12.6/27Release cadencea release every ~166.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count12
latest_release_tag1.8.2
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1,947
mean_days_between_releases166.1
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?

37Weak · 17% of overall
How it's scored
32.2/60Stars97 stars
12.3/25Forks31 forks
3.3/15Watchers5 watchers
Inputs used
forks31
stars97
watchers5
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
0/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MPL-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_badges0
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
28.1/80Monthly downloads128 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependentsnot reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesvapid
dependents
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads3,535
monthly_downloads128
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.5/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 71% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth17 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled17
top_contributor_share0.709
How it's scored
38.3/42Issue resolution91% of issues closed
28.3/30PR acceptance65/69 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
7.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 13/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
merged_prs65
open_issues4
closed_issues41
prs_merged_7d0
prs_decided_7d0
prs_merged_30d0
prs_decided_30d0
issue_closed_ratio0.911
closed_unmerged_prs4
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
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
16.4/25Owner reach190 followers of web-push-libs
19.3/25Track record9 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers190
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginweb-push-libs
public_repos9
account_age_days3,724
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on crates
4/35Publish recencylatest publish 1,352 days ago
4/20Version history1 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesvapid
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1,352

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

28At Risk · 19% of overall
How it's scored
0/24CI workflows
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests0 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_cino
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
0/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.rs/vapid
0/10Repository description
10/10Topics3 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicswebpush, python, javascript
has_wikiyes
homepage
docs_sitehttps://docs.rs/vapid
has_readmeno
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionno

Security

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

46Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
0/2.5CI-Tests0 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
3.8/7.5Code-ReviewFound 13/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowno data
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
0/7.5Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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-Permissionsno data
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated13
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive5
scorecard_aggregate3.5
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Dangerous-Workflow, Packaging, Signed-Releases, Token-Permissions. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
26.6/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: time 0.3.29 (moderate)
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriesno indirect dependency carries a known advisory
37.2/40No advisories left outstanding1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 195 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories2
affected_packages1
assessed_packages37
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Matched the crates:vapid@0.6.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 37 packages. 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.

39Weak · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
36.3/40Legible commit history68 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.68
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstraprust/vapid/Cargo.toml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
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_languageno
bootstrap_files
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifestsrust/vapid/Cargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
55/55Manageable file sizes0/10 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes17,724
source_files_sampled10
oversized_source_files0

Key facts

97GitHub stars
17contributors
3commits, last 12 months
141days since last push
12releases
1bus factor
4open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • Community profile unavailable
  • pypi package 'py-vapid' points at a different repository (https://github.com/mozilla-services/vapid); excluded from ecosystem scoring

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 31 ⇿
0Stars
31Forks
12Releases

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.

01325383122016-102021-062026-02
Major 1Minor 6Patch 3

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 3.5 / 10
3.5aggregate

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 15:19 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
0CI-Tests0 out of 17 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5Code-ReviewFound 13/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5
10Contributorsproject has 8 contributing companies or organizations
n/aDangerous-Workflowno workflows found
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
0Maintained0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0
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
n/aToken-PermissionsNo tokens found
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIcryptography>=46python/pyproject.toml
crates.iobacktrace0.3rust/vapid/Cargo.toml
crates.ioopenssl0.10rust/vapid/Cargo.toml
crates.ioserde_json1.0rust/vapid/Cargo.toml
crates.iobase640.22rust/vapid/Cargo.toml
crates.iotime0.3rust/vapid/Cargo.toml
crates.iothiserror2.0rust/vapid/Cargo.toml
All dependencies 11

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 4 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iobacktracedirect
crates.iobase64direct
crates.ioopenssldirect
crates.ioserde_jsondirect
crates.iothiserrordirect
crates.iotimedirect
PyPIcryptographydirect
PyPIcoverageindirect
PyPIflake8indirect
PyPImockindirect
PyPIpytestindirect
Dependency advisories 1

Installing crates:vapid@0.6.0 pulls in 37 packages, direct and transitive: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct dependencies.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
time0.3.29directmoderate20.3.47

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 v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI, crates.io.