MIT licensing, included tests, release notes, and a small dependency set provide useful structure for consumers. The workflow uses two unpinned actions, and no security policy is published, so maintenance hygiene is not yet strong.
78%
Total Score
67
100
94
75
The registry and repository are owned by the same individual user, so there is no demonstrated organizational backing to offset the concentrated contributor base.
Three releases were published over 56 days, with a median interval of about 1 day, showing recent delivery activity; the short history leaves long-term maintenance unproven.
One contributor made all seven recent commits, leaving the project dependent on a single person's continued availability.
The repository has no published security policy, which leaves reporting and response expectations unclear; this is a modest transparency gap for a small package.
The single workflow was fully analyzed with no dangerous triggers, untrusted checkouts, script injection, or audit findings. However, both referenced actions are unpinned, weakening build reproducibility, while the absence of a top-level permissions block is acceptable on its own.
We didn't find any vulnerabilities for this package.
| Dependency | Last Release | Score |
|---|---|---|
fakerphp/faker Version ^1.24 | — | — |
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.