GitHub stars are widely used as a proxy for trust — by investors evaluating open-source startups, by developers choosing dependencies, by hiring managers assessing candidates, and by the press covering "trending" projects.
That trust can be bought. Fake star campaigns use bot accounts, purchased engagement rings, and coordinated click farms to inflate a repository's apparent popularity at a fraction of the cost of real adoption. Some services sell thousands of stars for under $100.
GitProbe makes star inflation visible and measurable — before you make a decision based on it.
Note
Star count is not the same as star quality. A repo with 500 genuine stars from active developers is more credible than one with 50,000 purchased stars from empty accounts.
| Step | What happens | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Enter a repository | Paste any owner/repo — works on any public GitHub repository |
| 2 | We analyze the stargazers | Our engine samples up to 300 accounts and evaluates each one across three behavioral signals |
| 3 | Get an authenticity score | Receive a 0–100 score with per-dimension breakdown and AI-generated analysis |
No account required for a basic check. Sign in with GitHub to unlock higher sample sizes and save reports.
|
Fresh accounts created in bulk are the primary indicator of a fake star campaign. We calculate the age distribution of every sampled stargazer and flag abnormal clusters of newly created accounts. Red flag: >30% of stargazers with accounts under 30 days old at the time of starring |
Organic growth is gradual. Purchased stars arrive in sudden, unnatural spikes with no corresponding viral event, release, or press coverage to explain the surge. Red flag: 500+ stars accumulated within a 24-hour window, with no observable cause |
Real developers leave a trail: commits, issues, pull requests, followers. Bot accounts are empty shells. We score each stargazer by their observable GitHub activity level. Red flag: >40% of stargazers with zero public contributions or repository activity |
Every analyzed repository receives a final 0–100 authenticity score combining all three dimensions:
| Score | Label | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 85 – 100 | Likely Genuine | Organic growth pattern, active community, no significant anomalies detected |
| 🟡 65 – 84 | Mostly Genuine | Minor irregularities present; some low-quality accounts in the stargazer pool |
| 🟠 40 – 64 | Mixed Signals | Significant anomalies detected; manual review recommended before relying on star count |
| 🔴 0 – 39 | High Risk | Strong statistical indicators of coordinated fake star activity |
Prove your project's stars are real. Add a live GitProbe badge that links directly to your public score report:
[](https://www.fakestarchecker.com/report/owner/repo)Replace owner/repo with your repository path. The badge updates automatically whenever a new analysis is run.
Example for the Astro framework:
[](https://www.fakestarchecker.com/report/astro/astro)Badges are served as lightweight SVGs with no JavaScript and no tracking.
| Verify that your project's growth is organic. Share your score publicly to build trust with users and contributors who need to know your stars are real. | Add GitProbe to your due diligence workflow when evaluating open-source companies or developer tools. Community traction means nothing if the community is fake. | When a candidate lists a "popular" GitHub project on their resume, verify whether that popularity reflects real adoption by real engineers. | Study the anatomy of fake star campaigns. GitProbe's per-dimension scores and stargazer samples give you structured data to work with. |
How does GitProbe detect fake stars?
We analyze three behavioral signals across a statistical sample of stargazers:
- Account age — fake stars are typically generated by recently created accounts
- Star velocity — inorganic purchase events appear as statistical spikes in the accumulation timeline
- Stargazer activity — bot accounts have no meaningful GitHub history: no commits, no followers, no repos
Each dimension is scored independently (0–100) then combined into a weighted final score.
Is GitProbe free?
Yes. Basic analysis (up to 100 sampled stargazers) is completely free with no account required. Sign in with GitHub to increase the sample size for a more statistically robust score on large repositories.
How accurate is the score?
GitProbe samples up to 300 stargazers per analysis. For repositories with more than a few thousand stars, this is a statistically representative sample. The score is a probabilistic estimate, not a forensic audit — but it reliably identifies campaigns that deviate from organic growth patterns. A score below 50 is a strong signal worth investigating further.
What makes a stargazer account "suspicious"?
No single signal is conclusive, but combinations of the following are strong indicators of inauthentic accounts:
- Account created less than 30 days before starring the repository
- Zero public repositories
- Zero followers and following
- No commit, issue, or pull request history
- Missing avatar, bio, or location
The more of these signals an account exhibits, the lower its individual activity score.
Does GitProbe work on private repositories?
No. GitProbe only analyzes publicly accessible repositories and uses the GitHub public API. We never request access to private repository data.
Can I check my own repository?
Absolutely — and many maintainers do exactly this to get ahead of reputation questions. If your score is high, embed the badge. If it's lower than expected due to a past viral event or HackerNews spike, the report gives you the context to explain it.
This tool is relevant to discussions around: fake GitHub stars, star authenticity, GitHub bot detection, inflated star counts, OSS credibility scoring, open source due diligence, GitHub analytics, star fraud, stargazer behavior analysis, purchased GitHub stars, and GitHub reputation metrics.
🔍 Analyze a Repository · View a Sample Report · Privacy & Terms
GitProbe is not affiliated with GitHub, Inc. All analysis is based on publicly available data via the GitHub API.