programthink/zhao vs z4nzu/hackingtool
z4nzu/hackingtool shows stronger signals overall
As of June 2026, hackingtool shows healthier maintenance signals than zhao. hackingtool rates Healthy overall while zhao rates Concerns. zhao last saw a commit 4 years ago with 1+ active contributor, while hackingtool last saw a commit 3 months ago with 10+ active contributors. zhao is GPL-3.0-licensed while hackingtool is MIT-licensed. Neither has known critical or high-severity CVEs in its dependency tree.
Informational only. RepoPilot summarises public signals at the time of analysis. Not professional, security, or legal advice.
programthink/zhao →
Looks unmaintained — solo project with stale commits
copyleft license (GPL-3.0) — review compatibility; last commit was 5y ago…
no tests detected; no CI workflows detected…
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
last commit was 5y ago; Scorecard "Branch-Protection" is 0/10…
- ⚠Stale — last commit 5y ago
- ⚠Solo or near-solo (1 contributor active in recent commits)
- ⚠GPL-3.0 is copyleft — check downstream compatibility
- ⚠No CI workflows detected
- ⚠No test directory detected
- ⚠Scorecard: marked unmaintained (0/10)
- ⚠Scorecard: default branch unprotected (0/10)
- ✓GPL-3.0 licensed
What would improve this?
- →Use as dependency Concerns → Mixed if: relicense under MIT/Apache-2.0 (rare for established libs); 1 commit in the last 365 days
- →Fork & modify Mixed → Healthy if: add a test suite
- →Deploy as-is Mixed → Healthy if: 1 commit in the last 180 days; bring "Branch-Protection" to ≥3/10 (see scorecard report)
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests, cross-checked against OpenSSF Scorecard
z4nzu/hackingtool →
Healthy across the board
Permissive license, no critical CVEs, actively maintained — safe to depend on.
Has a license, tests, and CI — clean foundation to fork and modify.
Documented and popular — useful reference codebase to read through.
No critical CVEs, sane security posture — runnable as-is.
- ⚠Concentrated ownership — top contributor handles 57% of recent commits
- ✓Last commit 8w ago
- ✓10 active contributors
- ✓MIT licensed
- ✓CI configured
- ✓Tests present
Computed from maintenance signals — commit recency, contributor breadth, bus factor, license, CI, tests
Signal-by-signal breakdown
| zhao | hackingtool | |
|---|---|---|
| Stars | 13,984 | 73,012 |
| Last commit | 4y ago | 3mo ago |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Open issues | 384 | 100 |
| Has tests | — | ✓ |
| Has CI | — | ✓ |
| Test coverage | 0% | 3% |
| Dependency CVEs | No CVEs | No CVEs |
| Architecture grade | — | — |
| Cycles | — | — |
| Bottom-line | Concerns signals | Healthy signals |
Want the full analysis? programthink/zhao · z4nzu/hackingtool
Ask AI about programthink/zhao vs z4nzu/hackingtool
Open the chat with a comparison question pre-filled.