Read 2026-11-03
fkie-cad/cwe_checker: technical due diligence, read from its repository
What Borehole read in fkie-cad/cwe_checker's code and history at 7288311: 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.
| Dimension | Rating |
|---|---|
| Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance | strong |
| Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | adequate |
| Product & Engineering Maturity | not assessable |
| Security & Reliability Posture | strong |
| Observability & Operations | not assessable |
| Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable |
What the repository says
LICENSE: Relicensed: GPL-3.0 → LGPL-3.0 (2018-10-09)
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
strongNo finding.
Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity
adequateLittle of the recent change carries a trace of review
adequateIn the last 24 months, 7 of 97 commits (7.2%) carry any trace of review: a merge, a pull-request reference, a Reviewed-by or Reviewed-on trailer, a Closes/Fixes reference, a maintainer's sign-off on someone else's change, or a change applied by someone other than its author. That is low but not absent. Review may happen in a workflow this history does not record; a buyer should ask how change is approved before it ships.
| 7 of 97 commits in the last 24 months carry review evidence; 58.7% across all 550 |
Almost no process scaffolding exists in the repository
adequateOf 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.
| 1 of 5 markers present across 300 tracked files |
Pinned dependencies have not moved in 23 months
adequateThe lockfile last changed 705 days before the newest commit, and 53 commits have landed since. Every security fix published upstream in that time is absent until someone updates it, and the longer the gap the larger and riskier that update becomes.
| Cargo.lock last changed 2024-10-22 |
Product & Engineering Maturity
not assessableNot rated: only 9 of 19 checks could reach a conclusion here; the rest do not apply to this repository or could not read it.
Security & Reliability Posture
strongThe build runs third-party code it does not pin
adequate7 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.
.github/workflows/acceptance-tests.yml:31 — action pinned by tag |
.github/workflows/acceptance-tests.yml:36 — action pinned by tag |
5 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities
adequate5 of 139 locked dependencies match 5 published advisories in OSV. 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.
Cargo.lock — crossbeam-channel 0.5.13: GHSA-pg9f-39pc-qf8g (moderate), fixed in 0.5.15 |
Cargo.lock — anyhow 1.0.86: RUSTSEC-2026-0190 (unrated), fixed in 1.0.103 |
Cargo.lock — crossbeam-epoch 0.9.18: RUSTSEC-2026-0204 (unrated), fixed in 0.9.20 |
Observability & Operations
not assessableNot rated: only 4 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 assessableNot rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.
Read more, or read your own
The full report on fkie-cad/cwe_checker: 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.