The MIT license, clear README, and direct package repository make adoption transparent. A single maintainer, no tests, and no security scanning limit confidence for a package handling exception data.
58%
Total Score
50
88
67
One registry maintainer is reasonable for an individually owned package, but it leaves the project dependent on a single publisher and provides little redundancy if maintenance stops.
The package has had no release in about a year, after nine releases concentrated in its first few weeks. That pause raises maintenance risk, though the release history shows the project was initially active.
The repository recorded zero commits and zero active maintainers in the last three months, consistent with the roughly year-long release pause and suggesting limited ongoing maintenance.
Composer build tooling is present, but no security scanning tools were detected. That weakens the project's automated security hygiene without making the release unsafe by itself.
The linked repository has no security policy. This is a transparency and issue-reporting gap, particularly for a package that handles exception details and sends them by email.
We didn't find any vulnerabilities for this package.
| Dependency | Last Release | Score |
|---|---|---|
laravel/framework Version ^8.0|^9.0|^10.0|^11.0 | — | — |
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.