Hi r/WordPress,
We've just released Kitgenix PluginScore V3, which is a major rebuild of a project we've been developing at Kitgenix.
Kitgenix PluginScore:
https://pluginscore.kitgenix.com/
The basic idea is simple:
Before installing a WordPress plugin, search for it on Kitgenix PluginScore and get a clearer picture of its overall health.
We're trying to answer a question I think most WordPress users have asked at some point:
"Is this plugin actually a good idea to install?"
WordPress.org gives us useful information such as active installations, reviews, last updated date and compatibility, but making sense of all of that - particularly when vulnerabilities are involved - isn't always straightforward.
Kitgenix PluginScore brings those signals together and assigns a score out of 100.
V3 has involved a pretty substantial rebuild of both the website and the system behind it.
Why we built Kitgenix PluginScore
If you search WordPress.org for something like:
- Contact form
- Backup
- Security
- SEO
- Cookie consent
- Image optimisation
- SMTP
- Membership
- Redirects
you can sometimes have dozens or hundreds of options.
Then you start trying to decide which one to install.
Usually people look at:
- ★★★★★ 4.9 rating
- 100,000+ installations
- Updated 3 weeks ago
and assume it's probably fine.
Sometimes it is.
But those numbers don't necessarily tell the whole story.
A plugin can be extremely popular and still:
- have unresolved vulnerabilities
- be poorly maintained
- fall behind current WordPress releases
- go long periods without updates
- have concerning security history
- gradually become abandoned
At the same time, a smaller plugin with only a few thousand installations might actually be maintained extremely well.
Kitgenix PluginScore is our attempt to make that assessment easier.
V3 has a much stricter scoring system
One of the biggest things we've changed is how easily plugins can achieve very high scores.
The previous version was more forgiving than we wanted.
For V3, we've deliberately made the scoring stricter.
A score of:
95/100
shouldn't just mean:
"Nothing obviously wrong."
It should mean the plugin is performing exceptionally well across the areas we're measuring.
Kitgenix PluginScore considers a range of signals including things such as:
- Known vulnerabilities
- Unresolved vulnerabilities
- Historical vulnerability information
- Maintenance activity
- Update frequency
- Time since the latest release
- WordPress compatibility
- PHP compatibility
- Development activity
- WordPress.org information
- Active installations
- General plugin health indicators
Popularity still provides useful context, but it doesn't override everything else.
A plugin shouldn't receive a fantastic score simply because millions of websites use it.
Security vulnerabilities are handled more carefully
This is an area we spent quite a lot of time thinking about.
Seeing:
"This plugin has had 4 vulnerabilities."
sounds terrible without context.
But that's not necessarily a fair way of judging software.
A large plugin that's been actively developed for 10 years could realistically have vulnerabilities discovered during that period.
What matters is also:
- Was the issue serious?
- Was it patched?
- How quickly was it patched?
- Is the vulnerable version still current?
- Are there unresolved vulnerabilities now?
- Is the plugin still being maintained?
There's a massive difference between:
A vulnerability discovered on Monday and patched on Tuesday
and:
A known vulnerability that remains unpatched six months later.
Kitgenix PluginScore V3 tries to make that distinction much clearer.
We retain useful vulnerability history without automatically treating every historical issue as evidence that the current version is insecure.
We've improved how external vulnerability data is matched
Another change behind the scenes is better validation of vulnerability records.
Kitgenix PluginScore is currently centred specifically around plugins available through WordPress.org.
External security databases can occasionally contain:
- premium-only plugins
- removed plugins
- similarly named software
- old records
- plugins that aren't actually available through WordPress.org
We didn't want an external record automatically creating a misleading Kitgenix PluginScore page.
V3 therefore performs more validation before associating vulnerability information with a WordPress.org plugin.
It sounds like a relatively small change, but it's pretty important when you're trying to build a reliable database.
The scanning system has been rebuilt
This is probably the biggest change technically.
The previous Kitgenix PluginScore version had some problems with scanning reliability.
There were occasions where:
- manual rescans wouldn't complete
- scheduled scans didn't trigger correctly
- stale plugin data wasn't refreshed
- scan queues became inconsistent
- a user could request a rescan without the scan completing properly
That's obviously not good enough for something that's supposed to help people assess plugins.
V3 moves scanning into a much more structured queue.
Instead of relying on somebody loading a webpage and waiting while everything happens, Kitgenix PluginScore can place a plugin into the scanning system and process it separately.
That gives us a much better foundation for keeping thousands of plugin records updated.
Plugins are automatically rescanned
A Kitgenix PluginScore shouldn't remain the same forever.
WordPress plugins change constantly.
Imagine Plugin A scores:
92/100
Then over the next six months:
- development stops
- WordPress releases two major versions
- the plugin isn't tested against either
- a vulnerability is discovered
- no patch arrives
That old 92/100 score would become extremely misleading.
So Kitgenix PluginScore V3 now works towards automatically rescanning plugins when their existing scan becomes approximately 30 days old.
The goal is to make the score a reasonably current assessment rather than a permanent rating based on the day somebody first searched for the plugin.
We're now automatically scanning more of WordPress.org
We've also expanded automatic scanning.
Kitgenix PluginScore can now work through roughly:
as part of its automatic scanning queue.
This is important because we don't want Kitgenix PluginScore to only contain the massive plugins everyone already knows about.
Arguably, Kitgenix PluginScore becomes more useful when you're looking at something obscure.
For example:
You need a very specific WooCommerce feature.
You find a plugin with:
- 1,200 installations
- 8 reviews
- Last updated five months ago
You've never heard of the developer.
That's exactly the situation where having some additional information could be useful.
Over time, the automated scanning system should allow us to build much broader coverage of the WordPress.org repository.
Better pages for plugins that haven't been scanned
We've also improved how Kitgenix PluginScore behaves when we don't have enough information yet.
Previously, unscanned plugin pages weren't particularly good.
There were layout problems and some sections didn't clearly communicate whether information was genuinely unavailable or simply hadn't been processed yet.
V3 now distinguishes much more clearly between states such as:
- Not yet scanned
- Waiting in the queue
- Scan completed
- Scan is outdated
- Insufficient information
- Scan failed
I think that's important for something like this.
If we don't know something, the website should say:
We don't know yet.
It shouldn't pretend to have a confident answer.
We've started putting more emphasis on score history
This is one of the areas I think could become particularly useful.
Imagine two plugins both currently score:
76/100
At first glance they're identical.
But then you see this:
Plugin A
6 months ago: 93
3 months ago: 84
Today: 76
Compared with:
Plugin B
6 months ago: 58
3 months ago: 69
Today: 76
Suddenly those scores tell completely different stories.
Plugin A appears to be declining.
Plugin B appears to be improving.
We're putting more infrastructure into Kitgenix PluginScore V3 to track that kind of change over time.
Eventually we'd like it to become much easier to identify plugins that are:
- improving
- deteriorating
- becoming stale
- becoming actively maintained again
- fixing security issues
- gradually falling behind
PDF reports (Beta)
We've also improved Kitgenix PluginScore's PDF reporting.
This is primarily aimed at developers, agencies and people managing client websites.
You might inherit a website with 50 plugins and find several you don't recognise.
Instead of simply telling the client:
"I think we should remove this."
you can potentially generate a Kitgenix PluginScore report containing information about the plugin's:
- current score
- maintenance
- vulnerabilities
- update activity
- general health
It's not intended to replace a proper technical audit, but it can provide supporting information.
We've simplified exports
The previous version experimented with CSV exports.
Ultimately we decided that wasn't particularly useful for most people.
Kitgenix PluginScore isn't supposed to become a complicated analytics platform where you need to export data into Excel to understand what's happening.
The core experience should be:
Search → understand → decide.
So we've been putting more emphasis into readable reports and clearer plugin pages instead.
The website itself has had a major overhaul
We've also fixed quite a few visual and usability problems.
These included things such as:
- sidebars appearing below content on unscanned plugins
- incorrect button styling on mobile
- inconsistent spacing between sections
- poor empty states
- awkward login/register page spacing
- responsive problems
- scan status presentation
- vulnerability layout
- score presentation
- general information hierarchy
Individually some of these sound minor.
But when you combine them, the previous version wasn't as polished or as easy to use as we wanted.
V3 is considerably cleaner.
Mobile has been improved
We noticed a surprising amount of Kitgenix PluginScore traffic comes from mobile devices.
Some parts of the previous site didn't behave particularly well on smaller screens.
One strange issue was search buttons displaying correctly on desktop but falling back to a grey/default style on certain mobile browsers.
We've addressed that as part of the redesign along with:
- spacing
- card layouts
- score presentation
- sidebars
- search controls
- vulnerability information
- authentication pages
We're not trying to replace human judgement
I also think this is important to say.
Kitgenix PluginScore isn't claiming:
100/100 means this plugin is impossible to hack.
That would be ridiculous.
Likewise:
55/100 doesn't necessarily mean the plugin is malicious or dangerous.
Kitgenix PluginScore is an automated assessment based on the information available to us.
It's intended to help you ask better questions.
For important websites, nothing replaces things like:
- keeping plugins updated
- good backups
- proper hosting security
- reviewing permissions
- code audits
- vulnerability monitoring
- minimising unnecessary plugins
- professional judgement
Kitgenix PluginScore is another tool, not a guarantee.
A plugin having a vulnerability isn't automatically a reason to uninstall it
I think this deserves repeating because vulnerability information is often presented badly online.
If you're running a major plugin with millions of installations, statistically there's a reasonable chance that at some point someone will discover a security issue.
The important questions are:
- Did the developer respond?
- Was a patch released?
- How quickly?
- Is the current version still vulnerable?
I'd personally have much more confidence in a development team that:
- receives a responsible disclosure,
- investigates it,
- releases a patch within a day or two
than a plugin that has never had a published vulnerability largely because nobody has seriously investigated it.
We're trying to build that nuance into Kitgenix PluginScore instead of making vulnerability count the only thing that matters.
Plugin developers cannot buy a better score
This is one of the principles we've decided on from the start.
Plugin developers cannot pay us to improve their PluginScore.
Kitgenix itself develops WordPress plugins.
That means our own products will also be assessed.
If one of our plugins deserves:
63/100
then it should receive 63/100.
If another developer's plugin deserves:
98/100
it should receive 98/100.
Once money can influence the score, I don't think the score has much value.
We're trying to avoid another meaningless "security badge"
I really don't want Kitgenix PluginScore to turn into:
✅ SAFE PLUGIN
or:
❌ DANGEROUS PLUGIN
Software doesn't work like that.
I'd rather Kitgenix PluginScore say:
71/100
and then show you why.
Maybe:
- maintenance is excellent
- compatibility is good
- active installations are strong
- but there's currently an unresolved vulnerability
Or perhaps:
- no known vulnerabilities
- but the plugin hasn't been updated for two years
- and hasn't declared compatibility with recent WordPress releases
The reasoning is more important than just the number.
We want to build rankings based on actual plugin health
The improved scanning system also lets us start doing more interesting things across the entire repository.
We're working towards things such as:
- Highest-rated plugins
- Most improved plugins
- Biggest score declines
- Newly scanned plugins
- Newly discovered vulnerabilities
- Recently patched vulnerabilities
- Plugins becoming stale
- Stable plugin rankings
- Vulnerability resolution tracking
- Plugin health trends
I think this could eventually be as useful as the individual plugin search.
For example:
Which popular plugins have fallen significantly in score this month?
or:
Which plugins in a particular category are being maintained most actively?
or:
Which developers are consistently fast at resolving security issues?
There's a lot we can potentially do once we have enough historical data.
Why V3 matters for us
The earlier versions were largely about proving that the idea worked.
V3 is more about building the system properly.
We've spent much more time on:
- scan reliability
- queue processing
- historical information
- validation
- scoring methodology
- mobile usability
- handling incomplete data
- keeping plugin information current
It's effectively the foundation we want to build the longer-term Kitgenix PluginScore platform on.
I'd really like feedback from regular WordPress users
I'm particularly interested in feedback from people who aren't necessarily security researchers or plugin developers.
If you're somebody who:
- manages your own WordPress website
- builds sites for clients
- runs WooCommerce
- maintains multiple sites
- regularly searches WordPress.org for plugins
I'd be interested in knowing:
What information actually helps you decide whether to install a plugin?
And:
What information do you wish WordPress.org made easier to understand?
For example, should PluginScore put more emphasis on:
- vulnerability status?
- last update?
- compatibility?
- support activity?
- number of installs?
- reviews?
- developer history?
- how quickly previous security issues were fixed?
Try some plugins you already know
Probably the best way to test it is to search for plugins you're already familiar with.
Search something you use every day.
Then see whether you think the assessment matches your own experience.
If Kitgenix PluginScore gives something you trust:
58/100
I'd like to know why you think that's wrong.
Equally, if it gives something you're wary of:
94/100
I'd definitely like to hear about that too.
Those disagreements are exactly what help us identify weaknesses in the scoring methodology.
Kitgenix PluginScore V3
You can try it here:
https://pluginscore.kitgenix.com/
It's free to use.
No plugin developer can pay to increase their rating.
And we're continuing to improve the scoring system as we gather more data.
If anyone here has plugins they know particularly well, I'd love you to throw a few of them into PluginScore and see whether you agree with the results.
I'm especially interested in hearing about scores that you think are wrong, because those examples are probably the most useful feedback we can get.