The project includes tests, a changelog, and a security policy. Confirm the applicable GPL terms before adoption, and account for maintenance being concentrated in one contributor.
68%
Total Score
75
100
88
100
The manifest declares GPL-2.0-or-later, while the artifact license file is detected as GPL-3.0. Both are copyleft licenses, but the mismatch creates a real legal and transparency concern.
The repository is owned by an individual user rather than an organization, so the single-contributor activity shown by the bus-factor signal is not offset by clear organizational handoff capacity.
All five recent commits came from one contributor, so maintenance knowledge and release capacity are concentrated in a single person. The active repository partly offsets this, but not the continuity risk.
Composer build tooling is present, but no repository security-scanning tool was detected. That is a modest process gap rather than evidence of unsafe code.
The only workflow was fully analyzed with no reported audit findings or unsafe untrusted triggers. However, both action references are unpinned, so their contents can change independently of this release.
We didn't find any vulnerabilities for this package.
| Dependency | Last Release | Score |
|---|---|---|
laravel/framework Version ^10.0|^11.0|^12.0|^13.0 | — | — |
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.