25cb6fc · 5,000 commits · 11,008 files
Issued 2026-09-24
Nothing significant. Questions worth asking about Security & Reliability Posture, Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance.
67 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 2 findings are worth checking first. 13 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
Borehole's proprietary scoring is calibrated across hundreds of repositories. Each finding here reads significant, but its check has not yet held up often enough in that calibration to rate significant on its own. If one holds when someone checks it, it is significant.
- Words about people are today's: bands rather than exact shares, dates or day counts, and what the history measured rather than why.
- 1 finding that needed more history than this survey read is no longer published.
- 2 findings rated significant by a check that has not yet held up in Borehole's calibration are now worth checking first.
- 1 finding from checks Borehole's calibration found wrong more often than right is no longer published.
| Dimension | Rating | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance | adequate | |
| 02 | Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | adequate | |
| 03 | Organization & Key-Person Risk | strong | |
| 04 | Product & Engineering Maturity | adequate | |
| 05 | Security & Reliability Posture | adequate | |
| 06 | Observability & Operations | adequate | |
| 07 | Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable |
- 75% of non-merge commits carry any trailer at all
- no widespread author/committer date divergence
- the declared share is neither decisive nor negligible, so the true figure is more sensitive to undeclared work
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
01 · adequate · ratings ↑superset/security/manager.py is 6,398 lines, 60× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 105 lines. 70 files exceed 1,050 lines, the largest being 6,398. 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.
| line-count | superset/security/manager.py:1 — 6,398 lines (60× median) |
| line-count | superset/models/helpers.py:1 — 5,802 lines (55× median) |
| line-count | superset-frontend/plugins/plugin-chart-point-cluster-map/src/stories/data.ts:1 — 5,544 lines (52× median) |
| line-count | superset/mcp_service/chart/schemas.py:1 — 4,724 lines (44× median) |
| line-count | superset/config.py:1 — 3,565 lines (33× median) |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity
02 · adequate · ratings ↑Tests are retried until they pass
adequateThe suite is configured to retry failing tests (superset-frontend/playwright.config.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.
| superset-frontend/playwright.config.ts | superset-frontend/playwright.config.ts:48 — test retry |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
Organization & Key-Person Risk
03 · strong · ratings ↑No finding. 9 checks ran and none fired; the rejection log below says why each did not.
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · adequate · ratings ↑140 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequatesuperset-frontend/package.json declares 140 direct dependencies. Each one is a maintenance obligation, a supply-chain surface and a potential licence question that transfers with the asset. The count says nothing about whether any given dependency was a good choice; it says how many such choices a buyer inherits.
| direct-dependencies | superset-frontend/package.json — 140 declared |
| direct-dependencies | superset-frontend/packages/superset-ui-core/package.json — 45 declared |
| direct-dependencies | docs/package.json — 39 declared |
| direct-dependencies | superset-frontend/plugins/preset-chart-deckgl/package.json — 30 declared |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
Security & Reliability Posture
05 · adequate · ratings ↑1 Dockerfile runs the application as root
adequateNo 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.
| no-USER-instruction | .devcontainer/Dockerfile — runs as root |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
1 environment file is committed
adequatedocker/.env is tracked in git. Environment files are where credentials usually live, and committing one usually means nobody decided how secrets reach the running application. Whatever is in it is in the history for good. Check 05.1 says whether it holds anything credential-shaped.
| docker/.env | docker/.env — committed environment file |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
The build runs third-party code it does not pin
adequate4 steps pipe a download straight into a shell. 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.
| .devcontainer/Dockerfile | .devcontainer/Dockerfile:16 — download piped into a shell |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
99 of 400 migrations cannot be rolled back
adequate99 schema migrations (25%) have no working way back: an empty `downgrade`, a `down` that does nothing, or a data migration with no reverse. A bad deploy that includes one is recovered from a backup, not reverted. Ask when a restore was last rehearsed.
| superset/migrations/versions/2016-03-13_21-30_18e88e1cc004_making_audit_nullable.py | superset/migrations/versions/2016-03-13_21-30_18e88e1cc004_making_audit_nullable.py:104 — migration with no way back |
| superset/migrations/versions/2016-03-22_23-25_d2424a248d63_.py | superset/migrations/versions/2016-03-22_23-25_d2424a248d63_.py:34 — migration with no way back |
| superset/migrations/versions/2016-03-26_15-09_fee7b758c130_.py | superset/migrations/versions/2016-03-26_15-09_fee7b758c130_.py:34 — migration with no way back |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
5 SQL statements built from strings
adequate worth checking first5 places in product code build SQL by formatting or joining strings rather than passing parameters. Where any part of the string comes from a request, it is an injection point. Each site needs a look; the fix, parameters, is small.
The check that found this reads significant, but it has not yet held up often enough in Borehole's calibration to rate a finding significant on its own. Opening superset/db_engine_specs/snowflake.py:548 and the 1 other file it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| superset/db_engine_specs/snowflake.py | superset/db_engine_specs/snowflake.py:548 — SQL built from a string |
| superset/utils/encrypt.py | superset/utils/encrypt.py:369 — SQL built from a string |
| superset/utils/encrypt.py | superset/utils/encrypt.py:577 — SQL built from a string |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
3 shell commands built from strings
adequate3 places run a command through a shell (`shell=True`, `os.system`, `exec` with a template) rather than passing arguments. Where any part comes from outside, it is command injection. Ask where each one's input comes from.
| RELEASING/changelog.py | RELEASING/changelog.py:274 — command run through a shell |
| RELEASING/changelog.py | RELEASING/changelog.py:281 — command run through a shell |
| RELEASING/changelog.py | RELEASING/changelog.py:292 — command run through a shell |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
3 deserialisers that can run code
adequate3 places read data with a deserialiser that executes what it reads (pickle, `yaml.load` without a safe loader, object streams, `unserialize`). That is safe on data the system wrote itself and remote code execution on anything else. Ask where each one's input comes from.
| superset/key_value/types.py | superset/key_value/types.py:93 — code-executing deserialiser |
| superset/migrations/versions/2022-06-27_14-59_7fb8bca906d2_permalink_rename_filterstate.py | superset/migrations/versions/2022-06-27_14-59_7fb8bca906d2_permalink_rename_filterstate.py:58 — code-executing deserialiser |
| superset/migrations/versions/2022-06-27_14-59_7fb8bca906d2_permalink_rename_filterstate.py | superset/migrations/versions/2022-06-27_14-59_7fb8bca906d2_permalink_rename_filterstate.py:78 — code-executing deserialiser |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
4 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 5 high or critical
adequate worth checking first4 of 1,859 locked dependencies match 6 published advisories in OSV, 5 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.
The check that found this reads significant, but it has not yet held up often enough in Borehole's calibration to rate a finding significant on its own. Opening superset-frontend/cypress-base/package-lock.json and the 1 other file it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| superset-frontend/cypress-base/package-lock.json | superset-frontend/cypress-base/package-lock.json — extract-zip 2.0.1: GHSA-7pqw-9j4j-h8q3 (high) |
| superset-frontend/package-lock.json | superset-frontend/package-lock.json — image-size 0.7.5: GHSA-5p2g-fcmc-qvqq (high) |
| superset-frontend/cypress-base/package-lock.json | superset-frontend/cypress-base/package-lock.json — js-yaml 4.3.1: GHSA-2883-xcg3-v3hh (high), fixed in 4.3.2 |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
2 vendored components with no licence
adequateThird-party code is committed into this repository without any statement of the terms it arrived under. Unknown terms are harder to deal with than inconvenient ones: an awkward licence can be complied with, an absent one cannot. Each of these needs its origin established before the code changes hands.
| superset-frontend/plugins/plugin-chart-calendar/src/vendor/cal-heatmap.ts | superset-frontend/plugins/plugin-chart-calendar/src/vendor/cal-heatmap.ts — 1 tracked files, no licence file |
| superset-frontend/plugins/plugin-chart-parallel-coordinates/src/vendor/parcoords | superset-frontend/plugins/plugin-chart-parallel-coordinates/src/vendor/parcoords — 2 tracked files, no licence file |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
Observability & Operations
06 · adequate · ratings ↑No error reporter is wired in
adequateNothing in the service initialises an error reporter (Sentry, Rollbar, Bugsnag, Honeybadger or an APM agent). An exception in production reaches a person only if someone is reading the logs, which usually means a customer reports it first.
| error reporting | no error reporter initialised |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
Fit with the Acquirer
07 · not assessable · ratings ↑Not rated: structurally not assessable from a repository. What a person adds here.
Check it on the running system
7 checks against the running system follow from the findings above: what a buyer's engineer will try, how to run it first, and what to have ready. A paid survey of this repository includes them.
A paid survey of a public repository is also reviewed: a language model reads each finding against the code and withdraws only findings it judges the code contradicts, each listed with its reason. The review is a language model's reading of the findings against the code, and it can be wrong. It never adds a finding, never raises a band, and never removes a finding from a proven check or an advisory that affects the surveyed version.
What a person adds
The survey reads what the repository can show. The code cannot settle these questions, and on them this report states nothing. Each says where its answer lives: your own engineer, the company, or an assessor you choose can settle it. Questions marked measured open with something this repository shows.
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
01 · full coverage- measured The tree carries design documentation (docs/developer_docs/extensions/architecture.md and 4 more). Does it match what the team believes today? Ask them to walk through it against the code.
- measured The repository pulls code in through git submodules (.gitmodules). A buyer receives pointers, not that code. Can every submodule be fetched without the team's credentials, and who owns each one?
- Is the architecture right for the next three years of the product?
- Were the home-grown components reasonable choices when they were made, and are they now?
Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity
02 · high coverage- Is review real or a rubber stamp? Comment depth and time to approve need the pull request history.
- Is delivery planned and measured, or heroic?
- How are incidents run, reviewed and learned from?
Organization & Key-Person Risk
03 · partial coverage- measured 420 people have committed here. Which of them are you acquiring, and which are you replacing?
- Who mentors whom, and would that survive a departure?
- Can the team grow, and who stands behind the top three contributors?
- Is the seniority mix sound, and will pay survive your salary bands?
- Is the pace sustainable? Commit times cannot say: git keeps no reliable local time.
- Does the team want to stay after close?
- How are decisions made and disagreements resolved?
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · minimal coverage- Can this team deliver the stated roadmap on the stated timeline?
- Does leadership know about the debt, and is time budgeted to repay it?
- Is the engineering shape consistent with the commercial story?
Security & Reliability Posture
05 · partial coverage- measured No threat model is in the tree of what looks like a running service. Does one exist elsewhere, and who owns it?
- What has actually broken, how often, and how badly?
- What did external testing find, and was it fixed?
- What is the SOC 2, ISO 27001 or GDPR status, and where is the evidence?
Observability & Operations
06 · partial coverage- measured Nothing in the tree backs up or restores data. How is data backed up, and has a restore ever been rehearsed?
- measured No alert rule is defined in the repository. Where are alerts defined, who receives them, and when did one last fire?
- Are the dashboards opened, the alerts acknowledged and the pages answered?
- Are the service-level objectives actually met?
- Who carries the pager, and how often does it go off?
- What does it cost to run, and how much headroom is there?
Fit with the Acquirer
07 · none coverageNot rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.
- This is primarily a TypeScript codebase, with Python alongside (29% of source files). Does your engineering organisation already run TypeScript in production, or would this be the first?
- The bulk of this system sits in superset/, superset-frontend/, superset-websocket/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- 36% of added lines came through AI-declared commits. Does your organisation have a policy on inheriting and maintaining that code, and does your engineering team's tooling match how it was produced?
- The repository carries deployment configuration (.devcontainer/Dockerfile and 48 more). Does that match your deployment and on-call model, or does it need rehosting first?
- What is your tolerance for the findings above remaining unaddressed for the first two quarters after close, given everything else that will compete for this team's time?
- Which of these systems duplicate yours, and which get retired?
- What will integration cost, and in what order?
- Where does the team land in your organisation, and who reports to whom?
- Are there earn-outs, retention packages or contractor IP to assign?
- Do customer contracts limit hosting, regions or vendors?
A human assessment is Borehole's own paid service, €12,000+ (total price is determined per engagement; travel billed at cost). It is not independent of this report: the same business produced both. It is a separate contract, with its own scope, terms and reliance.
Embed the badge
Tied to this commit and this date, and it fades after 90 days — an honest badge is one that expires. A repository with significant findings gets a neutral "read" badge rather than a red one: the library is where the range is visible, not someone else's README.
[](/r/apache/superset/25cb6fc)If you embed it: link it to the report, remove it if the report is delisted, and do not present it as a certification or an endorsement.
Rejection log — 54 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 54 signals that ran and did not fire
Published on purpose. A signal that looked and decided not to fire has told you something, and this is the calibration data behind every threshold above.
Looked, and found nothing — 45
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few filesfiles 13,123 · top5 share 0.045 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 730 · per kloc 0.42 · lines read 1,750,953 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 0.422 · early test per code 0.354 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.343 · early delete per insert 0.118 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 2,084 · share 0.75 · with tests 1,562 |
| 06.telemetry_presence | a telemetry or error-reporting library is referencednote presence only; whether anyone watches it is not visible here · matches 38 |
| 06.structured_logging | a structured logging library is referencedmatches 8 |
| 06.healthcheck_presence | a health or readiness check is defined |
| 06.telemetry_depth | the service is visible in more than one way |
| 06.print_logging | the service logs through a loggerprints 283 · logger calls 1,696 |
| 06.correlation_ids | a request can be followed through the logstracing False · request id sites 10 |
| 03.contributor_concentration | no single contributor dominates the last 24 monthsyears 0.8 · window last 24 months · authors 420 |
| 03.knowledge_silos | every substantial directory has been touched by more than one personauthors 421 · directories 15 |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | an open contributor base, where one-commit contributors are normalauthors 421 · one off share 0.686 |
| 03.contributor_attrition | the dominant contributor is still activeauthors 421 · top share a quarter or more · top contributor last committed within the last three months |
| 03.critical_path_ownership | more than one person changes the critical pathsauthors 420 |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of recent change carries evidence of reviewmerges 0 · window last 24 months · with tracked 1 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 55 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 2,636 · source 6,916 · test ratio 0.381 |
| 02.release_cadence | tags are presenttags 25 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry contentsampled 5,000 · low content share 0.0 |
| 02.branch_protection_hints | process scaffolding is present in the repository |
| 02.ci_runs_tests | CI invokes a test runnerconfigs 55 · with tests 9 |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 101 · test files 2,676 |
| 02.ci_test_gating | no test run in CI is written so that it cannot failconfigs 55 |
| 02.revert_share | change is rarely undoneshare 0.0 · reverts 0 · recent commits 3,180 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 6 · commits since 0 · days since lockfile changed 0 |
| 02.lint_in_build | a linter or formatter runs in the buildwired 11 · ci configs 55 · product files 4,099 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 16.0 · repeat share 0.0 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 13,168 · write once share 0.464 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.0128 · product files 4,096 · distinct blocks 592,972 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 1,759,692 · files 55 · per kloc 0.04 |
| 01.build_reproducibility | every base image names a versionfloating 0 · from lines 14 |
| 01.unfinished_migration | no language migration is stalled halfway |
| 05.committed_secrets | no credential-shaped strings outside test and fixture pathsnote the working tree only; the history is 05.5 · patterns 7 · files read 8,746 |
| 05.security_guardrails | at least one standard guard rail is configured |
| 05.dependency_pinning | a lockfile is committed, so builds are reproduciblelockfile True |
| 05.license_present | a licence file is presentfound True |
| 05.secrets_in_history | no credential-shaped string was ever added outside test and fixture pathspatterns 7 · truncated False · added lines 1,408,594 |
| 05.outbound_timeouts | outbound calls set timeouts, or are fewcalls without timeout 1 |
| 05.tls_verification_off | no TLS verification is switched off in product codefiles 0 · sites 0 · pinned instead 0 |
| 05.resource_limits | every workload declares limitsworkloads 6 · without limits 0 |
| 05.license_copyleft_inherited | every licence found in vendored code is permissive or weak-copyleftvendored paths 3 |
| 05.license_grant_unclear | the licence is recognisable as Apache-2.0class permissive · license Apache-2.0 |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 9
Not a clean result. Each says why it could not answer here.
| Signal | Why |
|---|---|
| 04.fix_share_trend | fewer than six busy quarters to compare |
| 06.alert_rules | no alert rules in the repository; they may live in a console |
| 03.active_contributors | history too short to distinguish active from historical contributors |
| 03.second_contributor_attrition | too little history |
| 03.bus_factor_trend | fewer than three active years to compare |
| 03.joiners_and_leavers | too few regular contributors to see a trend |
| 02.long_lived_branches | too few merges to judge (squash and rebase leave none) |
| 05.license_manifest_conflict | no packaging manifest states a licence |
| 01.initial_dump | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 5,000 commits were read |
Anyone can check this report against the authoritative record — click the stamp, or enter YNQ4-H28Z-ZYTH at borehole.dev/verify.
The code commits to the 68 checks this run performed, the bands they produced, and the commit they were read at. It does not cover checks written since.
Put the mark in your README
The image is wrapped in a link to the verification page, so a reader can check it rather than take it on trust. If you embed it: link it to the report, remove it if the report is delisted, and do not present it as a certification or an endorsement.
[](https://borehole.dev/verify/YNQ4H28ZZYTH?via=badge)
Where this scan ran
This scan ran on ordinary cloud infrastructure (cloud-run), not in a hardware-isolated confidential VM. Nothing about it is attested by Google.
What an attested survey proves, and what it does not.
What this scan did with the repository — 6 steps
Written by the steps themselves as they ran, not described afterwards. A hand-written account of a data flow drifts the first time somebody changes the flow and not the account.
| At | Step | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| 0.4s | read repository metadata from the GitHub API | size mb: 1154.3authenticated: False |
| 35.3s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: 5,000 commits |
| 57.0s | read the git history | commits: 5000tracked files: 11008 |
| 177.3s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 177.3s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
| 177.3s | deleting the working copy |
Total 177.3s ·source content sent off this machine: none · calls to a language model: 0 · the clone was deleted when the survey ended
An automated reading of a repository's code and its history up to one commit, with public advisory records. It may be wrong, it is not legal, financial, investment or security advice, and it does not replace diligence by a qualified person. It is provided for information: nobody may rely on it (Borehole's terms, section 3).