Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-01 09:04 UTC

woodser / monero-java

Java library for using Monero

JavaMIT★ 112 stars⑂ 45 forkssince Apr 2017View on GitHub ↗

woodser/monero-java holds a health index of 75 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Vitality (83/100) and lowest on Security (49/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

75
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.

75
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 65 is calibrated to 75 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

woodserPersonal account
93 followers47 public repossince Jun 2015

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
Mavenio.github.woodser:monero-java0.8.54-451 day ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
8.3/36Commit cadence12/52 weeks with commits
17.1/18Commit volume79 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year79
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year12

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases87 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 1 days ago
27/27Release cadencea release every ~18.2 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count87
latest_release_tagv0.8.54
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release1
mean_days_between_releases18.2
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?

51Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
33.2/60Stars112 stars
13.7/25Forks45 forks
4.7/15Watchers8 watchers
Inputs used
forks45
stars112
watchers8
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (MIT)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

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

60Moderate · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
0.1/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 100% 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_share0.996
How it's scored
38.9/42Issue resolution93% of issues closed
27.5/30PR acceptance110/120 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptanceno first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-ReviewFound 1/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs110
open_issues3
closed_issues38
prs_merged_7d
prs_decided_7d
prs_merged_30d
prs_decided_30d
issue_closed_ratio0.927
closed_unmerged_prs10
first_time_authors_30d
first_time_prs_merged_30d
first_time_prs_decided_30d
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
14.2/25Owner reach93 followers of woodser
24.2/25Track record47 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers93
owner_typeUser
is_verified
owner_loginwoodser
public_repos47
account_age_days4,053
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable1 package(s) on maven
35/35Publish recencylatest publish 1 days ago
20/20Version history45 published versions
20/20Not deprecatedactive, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesio.github.woodser:monero-java
ecosystemsmaven
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish1

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

77Good · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows2 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
14/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests10 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://woodser.github.io/monero-java/javadocs/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics4 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmonero, java, jni, rpc
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://woodser.github.io/monero-java/javadocs/
docs_sitehttps://woodser.github.io/monero-java/javadocs/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

49Weak · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
1.8/2.5CI-Tests10 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-ReviewFound 1/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10/10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 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
0/7.5Vulnerabilities16 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate4.3
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.
How it's scored
18.5/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories1 affected: org.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk15on 1.70 (moderate 5.9)
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
34.9/40No advisories left outstanding1 advisory-carrying package(s) unaddressed past 90 days; oldest published 1,123 days ago
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories5
affected_packages1
assessed_packages17
unassessed_packages3
affected_by_severitymoderate 1
direct_affected_packages1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 17 resolved dependencies against OSV. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. 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 instructionsno CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
28.8/40Legible commit history54 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.54
agent_instruction_files
agent_instruction_max_bytes
How it's scored
12.6/18One-command bootstrappom.xml (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checkingJava (statically typed)
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice12 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_share0.12
toolchain_manifestspom.xml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable codeJava (statically typed)
50.5/55Manageable file sizes10/121 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageJava
largest_source_bytes281,830
source_files_sampled121
oversized_source_files10

Key facts

112GitHub stars
7contributors
79commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
87releases
1bus factor
3open issues
Mavenpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index maven:io.github.woodser:monero-java@0.8.54; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 45 ⇿
0Stars
45Forks
79Releases

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.

010203040504522017-042021-102026-04
Major 0Minor 6Patch 73

Each point covers 9 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 4.3 / 10
4.3aggregate

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 · 2026-08-01 09:04 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
7CI-Tests10 out of 14 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 1/15 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
0Contributorsproject has 0 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 0
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 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
0Vulnerabilities16 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 9
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
Mavenorg.apache.maven.surefire:surefire-junit-platform3.2.5pom.xml
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core${jackson-version}pom.xml
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind${jackson-version}pom.xml
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.module:jackson-module-jaxb-annotations${jackson-version}pom.xml
Mavenorg.apache.httpcomponents.client5:httpclient55.6.2pom.xml
Mavencommons-codec:commons-codec1.15pom.xml
Mavenorg.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk15on1.70pom.xml
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api1.7.25pom.xml
Mavenorg.zeromq:jeromq0.5.2pom.xml
All dependencies 20

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 9 direct and 11 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-coredirect
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databinddirect
Mavencom.fasterxml.jackson.module:jackson-module-jaxb-annotationsdirect
Mavencommons-codec:commons-codec1.15direct
Mavenorg.apache.httpcomponents.client5:httpclient55.6.2direct
Mavenorg.apache.maven.surefire:surefire-junit-platform3.2.5direct
Mavenorg.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk15on1.70direct
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-api1.7.25direct
Mavenorg.zeromq:jeromq0.5.2direct
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin3.8.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-dependency-plugin3.6.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-enforcer-plugin3.4.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-gpg-plugin1.5indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-javadoc-plugin3.2.0indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin3.0.1indirect
Mavenorg.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin3.2.5indirect
Mavenorg.junit.jupiter:junit-jupiter-engine5.7.0indirect
Mavenorg.junit.platform:junit-platform-runner1.7.0indirect
Mavenorg.slf4j:slf4j-simple1.7.25indirect
Mavenorg.sonatype.central:central-publishing-maven-plugin0.11.0indirect
Dependency advisories 1

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 17 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 1 carry known advisories, of which 1 are direct. 3 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
org.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk15on1.70directmoderate52.73.6

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 v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsMaven.