Borehole · Project · free tier
dicioteam/dicio-android
Free reading: not for reliance
3d1c154 · 1,724 commits · 681 files
Read 2026-11-03

dicioteam/dicio-android: technical due diligence, read from its repository

What Borehole read in dicioteam/dicio-android's code and history at 3d1c154: its licence, security advisories, releases, review practice, tests, dependencies and operations. Every finding cites the file and line it rests on. The full report also covers the team and asks the questions the code cannot answer.

DimensionRating
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenancestrong
Engineering Process & SDLC Maturitystrong
Product & Engineering Maturityadequate
Security & Reliability Postureadequate
Observability & Operationsnot assessable
Fit with the Acquirernot assessable

What the repository says

  • LICENSE: Relicensed: MIT → GPL-3.0 (2020-06-04)

Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance

strong

No finding.

Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity

strong
02.6

Almost no process scaffolding exists in the repository

adequate

Of five ordinary markers — CI workflows, CODEOWNERS, a pull-request template, pre-commit hooks, contribution guidance — 1 is present: CI workflows. Branch protection itself is a GitHub setting rather than a file, so this is a reading of proxies and not of the rules themselves. What it does establish is that the process is not written down anywhere a new engineer would find it.

Evidence
1 of 5 markers present across 681 tracked files

Product & Engineering Maturity

adequate
04.19

18% of bug fixes add or change a test

adequate

Of 62 fixes in the last 24 months, 11 touched a test. A fix without the test that would have caught the bug can quietly come back, and the suite never learns from what went wrong.

Evidence
11 of 62

Security & Reliability Posture

adequate
05.2

None of the standard security guard rails are configured

adequate

There is no disclosure policy, no automated dependency updates, no named code owners and no pre-commit configuration. None of these is load-bearing on its own. Their collective absence says that security posture here is whatever the current team happens to remember to do, which is not a posture that survives the team changing.

Evidence
checked 5 kinds of guard rail across 681 tracked files; 0 present
05.27

The build runs third-party code it does not pin

adequate

5 third-party CI actions are referenced by a tag or branch rather than a commit, so they run whatever that tag points to on the day. Tags have been moved to malicious commits in real supply-chain attacks, and a piped script is whatever the server returns that minute. Pinning to a commit is the fix, and it is small.

05.26

4 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 2 high or critical

adequate

4 of 129 locked dependencies match 5 published advisories in OSV, 2 of them rated high or critical. A lockfile says which version is installed, not whether the flawed code is reachable from this product, so each needs a look. Most are fixed by an upgrade, and the advisory names the version. This lockfile pins development tools alongside what ships and does not say which is which, so some of these may never reach a user.

Evidence
gradle/libs.versions.toml — org.jsoup:jsoup 1.21.2: GHSA-65r4-943x-97jj (high), fixed in 1.23.2
Gemfile.lock — rubyzip 2.4.1: GHSA-47m2-wp7j-p9vc (high), fixed in 3.4.0
gradle/libs.versions.toml — org.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-gradle-plugin 2.2.20: GHSA-r937-wjx7-w2jp (moderate), fixed in 2.4.20-Beta1
05.60

Relicensed: MIT → GPL-3.0 (2020-06-04)

adequate

The root licence changed 1 time(s). The latest terms restrict what users, hosts or a buyer may do in ways the earlier ones did not. Code taken under the old terms stays under them, so both matter in diligence.

Evidence
LICENSE — MIT from 2019-08-02
LICENSE — GPL-3.0 from 2020-06-04

Observability & Operations

not assessable

Not rated: only 5 of 16 checks could reach a conclusion here; the rest do not apply to this repository or could not read it.

Fit with the Acquirer

not assessable

Not rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.

Read more, or read your own

The full report on dicioteam/dicio-android: every dimension, the questions for the room, and the audit log.

Survey a repository: free on public repositories. Private code is read on your own machine by a collector whose source you can read first.