Borehole · Project · free tier
supabase/storage
Free reading: not for reliance
b74897c · 1,425 commits · 844 files
Read 2026-11-03

supabase/storage: technical due diligence, read from its repository

What Borehole read in supabase/storage's code and history at b74897c: 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 Maturitystrong
Security & Reliability Postureadequate
Observability & Operationsstrong
Fit with the Acquirernot assessable

Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance

strong
01.6

src/storage/database/pg.ts is 3,498 lines, 38× this codebase's median file

adequate

The median source file here is 92 lines. 6 files exceed 1,000 lines, the largest being 3,498. Size is not a defect on its own — some problems genuinely live in one place — but these are where merge conflicts, review fatigue and single-owner knowledge concentrate, and they are the first thing that slows an inheriting engineer down.

Evidence
src/storage/database/pg.ts:1 — 3,498 lines (38× median)
src/storage/object.ts:1 — 2,146 lines (23× median)
src/storage/protocols/s3/s3-handler.ts:1 — 1,796 lines (19× median)
migrations/tenant/0070-list-objects-with-versions.sql:1 — 1,663 lines (18× median)
src/internal/database/migrations/migrate.ts:1 — 1,223 lines (13× median)

Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity

strong
02.16

Tests are retried until they pass

adequate

The suite is configured to retry failing tests (acceptance/specs/admin.test.ts). A retry turns a flaky test green without saying why it failed, so a green build means the tests passed eventually. Ask how many retries a typical run needs, and which tests need them.

Evidence
acceptance/specs/admin.test.ts:645 — test retry

Product & Engineering Maturity

strong

No finding.

Security & Reliability Posture

adequate
05.1

1 credential-shaped string committed to the tree

adequate

Matches for JWT appear in tracked files outside test and fixture paths. They stay in the history even after they leave the tree, so what matters is whether each was rotated. The code cannot tell whether any of them is live, and that decides whether this matters: none sits in production configuration, and none is in a format its provider keeps for live keys. Is any of these live? Show that each was rotated after it was committed, and when. 7 other matchs set aside: expired tokens, licence tokens a vendor verifies with a public key, or placeholder text where a key would go. None grants access to anything.

Evidence
JWT pattern matched
05.6

1 Dockerfile runs the application as root

adequate

No USER instruction switches away from root, so the process runs with full privileges inside the container. It is a one-line fix and an ordinary expectation, which is why its absence is worth asking about: it usually says more about whether anyone has reviewed the deployment than about this container specifically.

Evidence
Dockerfile — runs as root
05.20

3 SQL statements built from strings

adequate

3 places in product code build SQL by formatting or joining strings rather than passing parameters. In each, what the code shows going in is a table or column name, a constant, or something the line does not show, not a request's value. Ask whether any value reaches these strings, rather than a parameter.

Evidence
src/storage/protocols/iceberg/pg.ts:56 — SQL built from a string
src/storage/protocols/iceberg/pg.ts:64 — SQL built from a string
src/storage/protocols/iceberg/pg.ts:170 — SQL built from a string
05.26

23 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 15 high or critical in what ships

adequate

23 of 615 locked dependencies match 47 published advisories in OSV, 15 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.

Evidence
package-lock.json — @fastify/busboy 3.1.1: GHSA-x8mw-p69m-v3mx (high), fixed in 3.2.1
package-lock.json — @grpc/grpc-js 1.14.4: GHSA-m9gg-hp2v-232j (high), fixed in 1.14.5
package-lock.json — @opentelemetry/propagator-jaeger 2.8.0: GHSA-45rx-2jwx-cxfr (high), fixed in 2.9.0
05.8

Manifest says ISC, licence file says Apache-2.0

adequate

package.json declares ISC. LICENSE contains the text of Apache-2.0. Package managers and downstream users read the first; auditors and acquirers read the second. One of them is wrong, and until it is settled the terms this code is offered under are genuinely ambiguous.

Evidence
package.json:141 — declares ISC
LICENSE — text of Apache-2.0
05.65

3 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 2 high or critical

adequate

The newest was published on 2026-11-02. A project that publishes advisories is telling its users about its fixes, and the count and pace say how much security work it carries. None of them affects the surveyed version.

Evidence
2026-11-02: GHSA-2p28-q2vx-mw6w (moderate), fixed in 1.84.14: Insufficient S3 signature lifetime validation allows replay of signed requests
2026-10-14: GHSA-8rrf-w776-x75g (critical), fixed in 1.80.2: Unauthenticated object uploads and overwrites through signed resumable upload routes
2026-10-14: GHSA-67rp-h2mf-ph72 (critical), fixed in 1.80.1: Unauthorized reads and writes to Iceberg analytics table files through S3 routes

Observability & Operations

strong
06.18

1 of 1 deployed images carry no version, or `latest`

adequate

1 images in the deployment configuration are named without a version or as `latest`. A redeploy can change the software without a commit, a rollback has nothing to roll back to, and nobody can say from the repository what is running.

Evidence
docker-compose.yml:6 — image without a version

Fit with the Acquirer

not assessable

Not rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.

Read more, or read your own

The full report on supabase/storage: 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.