¿Es Footballagent Seguro?
Footballagent — Nerq Trust Score 49.9/100 (Grado D). Puntuación basada en 5 independent trust signals.
Footballagent es un software tool con un Nerq Trust Score de 49.9/100 (D), basado en 5 dimensiones de datos independientes. Seguridad: 0/100. Mantenimiento: 0/100. Popularidad: 0/100. Datos de múltiples fuentes públicas incluyendo registros de paquetes, GitHub, NVD, OSV.dev y OpenSSF Scorecard. Última actualización: n/a. Datos legibles por máquina (JSON).
¿Es Footballagent Seguro?
Desglose de Puntuación de Confianza — Footballagent has a Nerq Trust Score of 49.9/100 (D). Measured across 5 independent trust signals.
¿Cuál es la puntuación de confianza de Footballagent?
Footballagent tiene una Puntuación de Confianza Nerq de 49.9/100, obteniendo un grado D. Esta puntuación se basa en 5 dimensiones medidas independientemente.
¿Cuáles son los hallazgos de seguridad clave de Footballagent?
La señal más fuerte de Footballagent es cumplimiento con 87/100. No se han detectado vulnerabilidades conocidas.
¿Qué es Footballagent y quién lo mantiene?
| Autor | eesuola |
| Categoría | Communication |
| Fuente | https://github.com/eesuola/footballagent |
| Protocols | a2a · rest |
Cumplimiento Regulatorio
| EU AI Act Risk Class | MINIMAL |
| Compliance Score | 87/100 |
| Jurisdictions | Assessed across 52 jurisdictions |
Alternativas Populares en communication
What Is Footballagent?
Footballagent is a software tool in the communication category: A smart football/soccer assistant for Telex.im providing live scores and league standings.. Nerq Trust Score: 50/100 (D).
Nerq independently analyzes every software tool, app, and extension across multiple trust signals including seguridad vulnerabilities, mantenimiento activity, license cumplimiento, and adopción por la comunidad.
How Nerq Assesses Footballagent's Safety
Nerq's Trust Score is calculated from 13+ independent signals aggregated into five dimensiones. Here is how Footballagent performs in each:
- Seguridad (0/100): Footballagent's seguridad posture is poor. This score factors in known CVEs, dependency vulnerabilities, seguridad policy presence, and code signing practices.
- Mantenimiento (0/100): Footballagent is potentially abandoned. We track commit frequency, release cadence, issue response times, and PR merge rates.
- Documentation (1/100): Documentation quality is insufficient. This includes README completeness, API documentación, usage examples, and contribution guidelines.
- Compliance (87/100): Footballagent is broadly compliant. Assessed against regulations in 52 jurisdictions including the EU AI Act, CCPA, and GDPR.
- Community (0/100): Community adoption is limited. Basado en GitHub stars, forks, download counts, and ecosystem integrations.
The overall Trust Score of 49.9/100 (D) is the weighted combination of these measured signals. It is a measurement, not a pass/fail or suitability judgment — weigh the individual signals against your own requirements.
Who Typically Evaluates Footballagent?
Footballagent is commonly evaluated by:
- Developers and teams working with communication tools
- Organizations evaluating AI tools for their stack
- Researchers exploring AI capabilities in this domain
How to read the signals: Footballagent's measured signals (seguridad 0/100, mantenimiento 0/100, documentación 1/100, community 0/100) are shown above. These are measurements, not a suitability judgment — weigh each signal against the requirements of your own use case and risk tolerance.
How to Verify Footballagent's Safety Yourself
While Nerq provides automated trust analysis, we recommend these additional steps before adopting any software tool:
- Check the source code — Revisar el/la repository's seguridad policy, open issues, and recent commits for signs of active mantenimiento.
- Scan dependencies — Use tools like
npm audit,pip-audit, orsnykto check for known vulnerabilities in Footballagent's dependency tree. - Reseña permissions — Understand what access Footballagent requires. Software tools should follow the principle of least privilege.
- Test in isolation — Run Footballagent in a sandboxed environment before granting access to production data or systems.
- Monitor continuously — Use Nerq's API to set up automated trust checks:
GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=footballagent - Revisar el/la license — Confirm that Footballagent's license is compatible with your intended use case. Pay attention to restrictions on commercial use, redistribution, and derivative works. Some AI tools use dual licensing or have separate terms for enterprise customers that differ from the open-source license.
- Check community signals — Look at the project's issue tracker, discussion forums, and social media presence. A healthy community actively reports bugs, contributes fixes, and discusses seguridad concerns openly. Low community engagement may indicate limited peer review of the codebase.
Common Safety Concerns with Footballagent
When evaluating whether Footballagent is safe, consider these category-specific risks:
Understand how Footballagent processes, stores, and transmits your data. Revisar el/la tool's privacy policy and data retention practices, especially for sensitive or proprietary information.
Check Footballagent's dependency tree for known vulnerabilities. Tools with outdated or unmaintained dependencies pose a higher seguridad risk.
Regularly check for updates to Footballagent. Seguridad patches and bug fixes are only effective if you're running the latest version.
If Footballagent connects to external APIs or services, each integration point is a potential attack surface. Audit all third-party connections, verify that data shared with external services is minimized, and ensure that integration credentials are rotated regularly.
Verify that Footballagent's license is compatible with your intended use case. Some AI tools have restrictive licenses that limit commercial use, redistribution, or derivative works. Using Footballagent in violation of its license can expose your organization to legal liability.
Footballagent and the EU AI Act
Footballagent is classified as Minimal Risk under the EU AI Act. This is the lowest risk category, meaning it faces minimal regulatory requirements. However, transparency obligations still apply.
Nerq's cumplimiento assessment covers 52 jurisdictions worldwide. For organizations deploying AI tools in regulated environments, understanding these classifications is essential for legal cumplimiento.
Best Practices for Using Footballagent Safely
Whether you're an individual developer or an enterprise team, these practices will help you get the most from Footballagent while minimizing risk:
Periodically review how Footballagent is used in your workflow. Check for unexpected behavior, permissions drift, and cumplimiento with your seguridad policies.
Ensure Footballagent and all its dependencies are running the latest stable versions to benefit from seguridad patches.
Grant Footballagent only the minimum permissions it needs to function. Avoid granting admin or root access.
Subscribe to Footballagent's seguridad advisories and vulnerability disclosures. Use Nerq's API to get automated trust score updates.
Create and maintain a clear policy for how Footballagent is used within your organization, including data handling guidelines and acceptable use cases.
Situations That Warrant Independent Review of Footballagent
Nerq's signals are one input. In the following situations, evaluate Footballagent's measured signals against your own requirements before making a decision:
- Environments handling sensitive or regulated data (healthcare, finance, government)
- Mission-critical systems where downtime has significant business impact
- Deployments with strict regulatory requirements that must be independently validated
For each situation, compare Footballagent's measured trust score of 49.9/100 and its individual signals against your organization's own criteria. Nerq does not assert whether Footballagent is suitable for any particular use.
How Footballagent Compares to Industry Standards
Nerq indexes over 6 million software tools, apps, and packages across dozens of categories. Among communication tools, the average Trust Score is 62/100. Footballagent's score of 49.9/100 is below the category average of 62/100.
This suggests that Footballagent trails behind many comparable communication tools. Organizations with strict seguridad requirements should evaluate whether higher-scoring alternatives better meet their needs.
Industry benchmarks matter because they contextualize a tool's safety profile. A score that looks moderado in isolation may actually represent strong performance within a challenging category — or vice versa. Nerq's category-relative analysis helps teams make informed decisions by showing not just absolute quality, but how a tool ranks against its direct peers.
Trust Score History
Nerq continuously monitors Footballagent and recalculates its Trust Score as new data becomes available. Our scoring engine ingests real-time signals from source repositories, vulnerability databases (NVD, OSV.dev), package registries, and community metrics. When a new CVE is published, a major release ships, or mantenimiento patterns change, Footballagent's score is updated within 24 hours.
Historical trust trends reveal whether a tool is improving, stable, or declining over time. A tool that consistently maintains or improves its score demonstrates ongoing commitment to seguridad and quality. Conversely, a downward trend may signal reduced mantenimiento, growing technical debt, or unresolved vulnerabilities. To track Footballagent's score over time, use the Nerq API: GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=footballagent&include=history
Nerq retains trust score snapshots at regular intervals, enabling trend analysis across weeks and months. Enterprise users can access detailed historical reports showing how each dimension — seguridad, mantenimiento, documentación, cumplimiento, and community — has evolved independently, providing granular visibility into which aspects of Footballagent are strengthening or weakening over time.
Footballagent vs Alternativas
In the communication category, Footballagent scores 49.9/100. There are higher-scoring alternatives available. For a detailed comparison, see:
- Footballagent vs Real-Time-Voice-Cloning — Trust Score: 56.9/100
- Footballagent vs ChatGPT — Trust Score: 59.4/100
- Footballagent vs jan — Trust Score: 64.4/100
Puntos Clave
- Footballagent has a measured Nerq Trust Score of 49.9/100 (D) — a composite of independent signals, not a suitability judgment.
- Among communication tools, Footballagent scores below the category average of 62/100 (a positional measurement relative to peers).
- The individual signals — seguridad, mantenimiento, documentación, cumplimiento, community — are shown above. Weigh them against your own requirements.
- Query the current measured values via Nerq's Preflight API.
Preguntas Frecuentes
¿Es Footballagent Seguro?
¿Cuál es la puntuación de confianza de Footballagent?
¿Cuáles son alternativas más seguras a Footballagent?
¿Con qué frecuencia se actualiza la puntuación de Footballagent?
¿Puedo usar Footballagent en un entorno regulado?
Ver también
Disclaimer: Las puntuaciones de confianza de Nerq son evaluaciones automatizadas basadas en señales disponibles públicamente. No son respaldos ni garantías. Siempre realice su propia diligencia debida.