MIT licensing, repository tests, and organization backing provide useful transparency and maintenance capacity. Unpinned workflow actions and no security policy or scanning leave preventable hygiene gaps.
60%
Total Score
75
100
88
67
The latest release was over two years ago, with no releases in the last 12 months and only three releases overall. This is meaningful evidence of slowing maintenance, though the repository was pushed more recently.
There were no commits and no active maintainers in the last three months. Combined with the stale release history, this raises the risk that fixes may arrive slowly.
The repository uses Make and Composer, showing basic build support, but no security scanning tools were detected. That is a maintenance and assurance gap rather than a severe dependency risk.
No security policy was found in the repository. This weakens transparency around vulnerability reporting, although it is not by itself evidence that the package is unsafe.
The single workflow was fully analyzed with no high-confidence audit findings or dangerous triggers, but all three action references are unpinned. That leaves avoidable workflow supply-chain exposure.
We didn't find any vulnerabilities for this package.
| Dependency | Last Release | Score |
|---|---|---|
fond-of-impala/company-user-reference Version ^1.0.0 | — | — |
fond-of-oryx/jellyfish-sales-order-extension Version ^1.0.0 || ^2.0.0 | — | — |
fond-of-oryx/company-user-reference-sales-connector Version ^1.0.0 || ^2.0.0 | — | — |
Connect your repositories to instantly see whether vulnerable or malicious packages exist in your codebase.
Free. No credit card required.

I consent to receiving marketing communications based on Aikido’s Privacy Policy.
SOC 2Compliant
ISO 27001Compliant
ISO 42001Compliant© All Intel data is openly available and commercially licensed.