Documentation, licensing, and a clean package layout reduce adoption friction. The project is small and quiet, with one publisher and no security policy, so pinning this version carries maintenance risk.
58%
Total Score
50
100
72
88
Only one registry account has publishing access. That is a thin publishing base for continuity, although the repository owner matches that publisher.
The repository is owned by an individual rather than an organization, so the single publisher and inactive activity represent a genuine continuity risk rather than normal organization publishing hygiene.
This is the only release, published about four years ago, with no releases in the last 12 months. That limits evidence of ongoing maintenance and lowers confidence in future support.
There were no commits and no active maintainers in the last three months. Combined with the last push being about four years ago, this is strong evidence of inactive maintenance.
The repository name matches the package, but its README does not mention the package name. The name match reduces concern about a mismatched repository, while the missing mention is a minor transparency gap.
We didn't find any vulnerabilities for this package.
| Dependency | Last Release | Score |
|---|---|---|
illuminate/support Version ^5.5|^6.0|^7.0|^8.0|^9.0 | — | — |
illuminate/validation Version ^5.5|^6.0|^7.0|^8.0|^9.0 | — | — |
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.