Thorough documentation, tests, and a small runtime dependency set improve confidence. The repository lacks a security policy, and all three workflow actions are unpinned; maintenance history is still too short to establish maturity.
62%
Total Score
50
100
86
67
The repository is owned by a user account rather than an organization, so the project has a comparatively narrow visible ownership base. This is a modest capacity concern, not evidence of abandonment on its own.
This is the package's first release, published 0 days ago, so there is no release track record or established maintenance cadence yet.
Composer build tooling is present, but no security scanning tool was detected. The missing scanner is a meaningful hygiene gap for an authentication package, though it is not evidence of unsafe code by itself.
No security policy was found in the repository, leaving vulnerability-reporting expectations and response procedures undocumented for a security-focused package.
The single workflow was fully analyzed with no dangerous triggers, untrusted checkout, script injection, or auditor findings. However, all 3 of 3 action references are unpinned, which weakens build reproducibility and supply-chain integrity.
We didn't find any vulnerabilities for this package.
No maintainer information available.
| Dependency | Last Release | Score |
|---|---|---|
migears/security Version ^2.0 | — | — |
psr/simple-cache Version ^3.0 | — | — |
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.