599026a · 23,206 commits · 11,004 files
Issued 2026-10-03
Nothing significant. Questions worth asking about Security & Reliability Posture, Product & Engineering Maturity.
105 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 1 finding is worth checking first. 18 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 04.62 Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
- names Apache Software Foundation AGENTS.md:135
- states a policy on AI-generated contributions SECURITY.md:40
- 4 submodule(s) this survey does not read: .github/actions/pr-lint-action, .github/actions/cached-dependencies, .github/actions/chart-testing-action .gitmodules:1
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.
- 05.26 7 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 4 high or critical in what ships
- 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 | strong | |
| 02 | Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | strong | |
| 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 |
- 30% of non-merge commits carry any trailer at all
- low trailer coverage: the convention may not be in consistent use
- 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 · strong · ratings ↑superset/security/manager.py is 6,398 lines, 60× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 105 lines. 68 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.
A note that does not affect this rating: measured against its own codebase's median, it is below the 85th percentile of 382 surveyed projects' largest files, where this check begins to count.
| 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/mcp_service/chart/schemas.py:1 — 4,728 lines (45× median) |
| line-count | superset/config.py:1 — 3,565 lines (33× median) |
| line-count | superset/dashboards/api.py:1 — 3,530 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 · strong · 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.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| 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. 10 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 | pyproject.toml — 69 declared |
| direct-dependencies | superset-frontend/packages/superset-ui-core/package.json — 45 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.
39 feature flags have been live for over a year
adequate78 feature flags appear in the history. 28 were removed; 39 are still in the code more than a year after they were added, the oldest since Jan 2019. A flag that stays is a permanent branch, and each one doubles what has to be tested. Ask which are still switched, and who owns retiring them.
| tests/utils_tests.py | tests/utils_tests.py — flag FOO since Jan 2019 |
| superset/models/core.py | superset/models/core.py — flag TAGGING_SYSTEM since Jul 2019 |
| superset/db_engine_specs/presto.py | superset/db_engine_specs/presto.py — flag PRESTO_EXPAND_DATA since Aug 2019 |
| superset/views/core.py | superset/views/core.py — flag SQLLAB_BACKEND_PERSISTENCE since Nov 2019 |
| tests/thumbnails_tests.py | tests/thumbnails_tests.py — flag THUMBNAILS since Apr 2020 |
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.
7 files still carry code deprecated more than two years ago
adequate7 files were marked deprecated over two years ago and still are, the oldest since Jun 2021. A deprecation is a promise to remove. Ask what still depends on these, and whether removing them is scheduled.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| superset/initialization/__init__.py | superset/initialization/__init__.py — deprecated since Jun 2021 |
| superset/views/core.py | superset/views/core.py — deprecated since Nov 2022 |
| superset/db_engine_specs/base.py | superset/db_engine_specs/base.py — deprecated since Apr 2023 |
| superset/views/datasource/views.py | superset/views/datasource/views.py — deprecated since Apr 2023 |
| superset-frontend/packages/superset-ui-core/src/utils/featureFlags.ts | superset-frontend/packages/superset-ui-core/src/utils/featureFlags.ts — deprecated since Jan 2024 |
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.
Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
adequateThe newest release, 6.1.0, is not on the branch this survey read; the newest release on it is 0.20.1. The shipped product may differ from what this report describes. Survey the release branch too.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| c83fb2bb1 | tag 6.1.0 |
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 ↑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.
7 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 4 high or critical in what ships
adequate worth checking first7 of 1,312 locked dependencies match 9 published advisories in OSV, 4 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/package-lock.json settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| superset-frontend/package-lock.json | superset-frontend/package-lock.json — brace-expansion 5.0.9: GHSA-6j4f-fj2g-mc7p (high), fixed in 5.0.10 |
| superset-frontend/package-lock.json | superset-frontend/package-lock.json — image-size 0.7.5: GHSA-w3rx-r6r6-pgpr (high), fixed in 2.0.3 |
| superset-frontend/package-lock.json | superset-frontend/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.
The production build publishes source maps
adequateThe build configuration emits source maps for production, so the original source, with its comments and structure, is downloadable by every visitor. Upload them to an error tracker and keep them off the public server instead.
| superset-embedded-sdk/webpack.config.js | superset-embedded-sdk/webpack.config.js:34 — source maps in a production build |
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.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| 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
adequate2 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.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| .github/workflows/pre-commit.yml | .github/workflows/pre-commit.yml:63 — 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.
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.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| 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.
7 places insert HTML from a variable without sanitising it
adequate7 places set HTML from a value that is neither a literal nor passed through a sanitiser. Where the value can come from a user, that is stored cross-site scripting, and it is the first thing a buyer's security review looks for in a frontend.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| superset-frontend/plugins/preset-chart-deckgl/src/utilities/HandlebarsRenderer.tsx | superset-frontend/plugins/preset-chart-deckgl/src/utilities/HandlebarsRenderer.tsx:82 — HTML from a variable |
| superset-frontend/src/dashboard/components/gridComponents/Chart/Chart.tsx | superset-frontend/src/dashboard/components/gridComponents/Chart/Chart.tsx:806 — HTML from a variable |
| superset-frontend/src/dashboard/util/injectCustomCss.ts | superset-frontend/src/dashboard/util/injectCustomCss.ts:45 — HTML from a variable |
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.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| 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.
17 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 5 high or critical
adequateThe newest was published on 2026-07-30. A project that publishes advisories is telling its users about its fixes, and the count and pace say how much security work it carries. Whether 13 of them are fixed in the code you ship could not be told from this history: its version is only known to be at least 0.20.1. Answer lives in: the release you run, set against each fixed version. GHSA-w6c7-j32f-rq8j (moderate), GHSA-2cx9-54hp-r698 (moderate), GHSA-92qf-8gh3-gwcm (low) affect 0.20.1, the newest release in this history, and not the surveyed commit: their fixes are in the surveyed commit, and whether a release cut elsewhere carries them could not be told. Answer lives in: the version you run. The record is incomplete: NVD: 2 records name superset with nothing tying them to this repository (CVE-2024-32973, CVE-2026-97711).
A note that does not affect this rating: it describes the project's advisory record, and no advisory in it is known to affect the surveyed commit.
| CVE-2026-23981 | 2026-07-30: CVE-2026-23981 (moderate): An Improper Authorization vulnerability exists in Apache Superset allowing an authenticated user with permissions to update charts to modify dashboards they do |
| CVE-2026-23985 | 2026-07-30: CVE-2026-23985 (moderate): A Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerability exists in Apache Superset versions 1.5.0 through 5.0.0. The vulnerability is located in the sql_par |
| GHSA-3m2g-v7jf-7fxc | 2026-02-24: GHSA-3m2g-v7jf-7fxc (high), fixed in 6.0.0: Apache Superset Improper Authorization allows low-privileged users to bypass access controls |
| GHSA-48m2-v2r8-h23m | 2026-02-24: GHSA-48m2-v2r8-h23m (moderate), fixed in 4.1.2: Apache Superset: Incomplete DISALLOWED_SQL_FUNCTIONS default list for ClickHouse engine |
| GHSA-gvxg-9hqx-f4rg | 2026-02-24: GHSA-gvxg-9hqx-f4rg (moderate), fixed in 6.0.0: Apache Superset allows privileged users to conduct error-based SQL Injection |
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 ↑Readiness and liveness probes are identical in 2 of 2 workloads
adequateBoth probes call the same endpoint. When a dependency slows down, the liveness probe fails with the readiness probe, so the platform restarts pods that only needed taking out of rotation, and a partial outage becomes a full one. Liveness should ask whether the process is alive; readiness whether it can serve.
| helm/superset/values.yaml | helm/superset/values.yaml — same probe endpoint twice |
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.
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.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| 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.
1 of 3 deployed images carry no version, or `latest`
adequate1 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.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| docker-compose-image-tag.yml | docker-compose-image-tag.yml:120 — image without a version |
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
9 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 1,693 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- measured 3,498 commits landed in the last year, against 1,340 the year before (+161%). What drove it: new people, a deadline, or code produced faster than before?
- 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 (38% 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?
- 54% of lines added in the last 12 months (19% 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 (Dockerfile and 43 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/599026a)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 — 87 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 87 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 — 77
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few filesfiles 32,252 · top5 share 0.023 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 731 · per kloc 0.41 · lines read 1,769,350 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 1.04 · early test per code 0.392 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.434 · early delete per insert 0.533 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 3,003 · share 0.662 · with tests 1,988 |
| 04.fix_share_trend | fixing is not crowding out building |
| 04.schema_churn | columns, once added, staydropped within 90 days 0 · columns added last year 11 |
| 04.compat_layers | little code is kept for the old wayshare 0.002 · code files 3,847 · compat files 8 |
| 04.dependency_redundancy | one library per job, mostly |
| 06.telemetry_presence | a telemetry or error-reporting library is referencednote presence only; whether anyone watches it is not visible here · matches 30 |
| 06.structured_logging | a structured logging library is referencedmatches 2 |
| 06.healthcheck_presence | a health or readiness check is defined |
| 06.telemetry_depth | the service is visible in more than one way |
| 06.correlation_ids | a request can be followed through the logstracing False · request id sites 10 |
| 06.usage_reporting_default | the product's code names no reporting hostsettings on 0 · settings off 0 |
| 06.single_replica | an autoscaler or disruption budget is definedworkloads 6 |
| 06.environment_branching | environment differences live in configurationsites 0 |
| 06.release_markers | releases are markedtags last year 33 · release commits 0 · changelog commits 20 |
| 06.migrate_on_start | migrations do not run at container start |
| 03.contributor_concentration | no single contributor dominates the last 24 monthsyears 11.2 · window last 24 months · authors 1,693 |
| 03.active_contributors | more than one contributor active in the trailing yearall time 1,693 · active 12mo 438 |
| 03.knowledge_silos | every substantial directory has been touched by more than one personauthors 1,693 · directories 11 |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | an open contributor base, where one-commit contributors are normalauthors 1,693 · one off share 0.639 |
| 03.contributor_attrition | no contributor dominates enough for their absence to matterauthors 1,693 · top share less than a quarter · top contributor last committed within the last three months |
| 03.critical_path_ownership | more than one person changes the critical pathsauthors 609 |
| 03.second_contributor_attrition | the second and third contributors are still active |
| 03.bus_factor_trend | the team has not narrowed to one person |
| 03.joiners_and_leavers | the team is not shrinkingleft 15 · joined 62 · regular last year 93 |
| 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 2,909 · source 6,753 · test ratio 0.431 |
| 02.release_cadence | tags are presenttags 566 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry contentsampled 23,002 · low content share 0.013 |
| 02.branch_protection_hints | process scaffolding is present in the repository |
| 02.ci_runs_tests | CI invokes a test runnerconfigs 55 · with tests 11 |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 52 · test files 2,972 |
| 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 2 · recent commits 4,839 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 6 · commits since 12 · days since lockfile changed 0 |
| 02.lint_in_build | a linter or formatter runs in the buildwired 14 · ci configs 55 · product files 3,847 |
| 02.commit_size | changes arrive in reviewable sizesshare 0.032 · commits 4,376 · over 2000 lines 138 |
| 01.burst_import | the largest burst was data and assets (100% of it), which explains the rate: translations arrive from a vendor in bulk, dependencies and generated code are committed whole, a merged pull request is dated when it merged, not when it was written, a branch merged by a merge commit was reviewed as one piece, and an export or mirror tool dates history when it replays itlargest commits 72c2b7a..b52865d · bursts explained 1 · largest net added 205,341 |
| 01.initial_dump | first commit is not a disproportionate share of the codebaseinsertions 7,431 · share of insertions 0.0008 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 22.77 · repeat share 0.011 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 4,054 · write once share 0.329 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.0134 · product files 3,844 · distinct blocks 401,927 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 1,778,100 · files 56 · per kloc 0.04 |
| 01.build_reproducibility | every base image names a versionfloating 0 · from lines 13 |
| 01.unfinished_migration | no language migration is stalled halfway |
| 01.weights_in_git | no model weights are committedfiles 0 |
| 05.committed_secrets | no credential-shaped strings outside test and fixture pathsnote the working tree only; the history is 05.5 · patterns 8 · files read 8,758 |
| 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.container_runs_as_root | every shipped Dockerfile drops to a non-root user or builds on a non-root base imagedockerfiles 2 |
| 05.outbound_timeouts | outbound calls set timeouts, or are fewcalls without timeout 0 |
| 05.sql_from_strings | no SQL is assembled from strings in product codefiles 0 · sites 0 · value interpolated 0 |
| 05.shell_from_strings | product code does not build shell commands from stringssites 0 |
| 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.privileged_workloads | no workload runs privileged or in the host's namespacessites 0 · behind a setting or built here 0 |
| 05.credentials_in_deploy_config | deployment configuration references secrets, never holds themfiles 0 · sites 0 |
| 05.public_env_secret | only publishable values carry a public prefixnames 0 · sites 0 · not secrets 0 |
| 05.signing_material | no signing keystore or profile is committedfiles 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 |
| 05.committed_native_libraries | no widely used compiled library is committed to the productlibraries 0 |
| 04.api_versions_coexisting | one API version is served, or none |
| 04.dependency_churn | few dependencies were added and dropped within 60 daysdependencies seen 282 · added in two years 101 · removed within 60 days 3 |
| 04.ci_platforms_dropped | no platform was dropped from CI in the last two years |
| 04.repository_status | the README's first screen states no end, move or freezestatements 0 |
| 02.development_elsewhere | nothing says development happens elsewhereno pr statements 0 · mirror statements 0 · replayed commit share 0.0 |
| 05.licence_changes | the root licence has not changed in the history readlicence versions 1 · unreleased changes 0 |
| 05.paid_edition | no directory carries a separate paid-edition licencedirectories 0 |
| 04.releases_stopped | releases keep pace with developmentmedian gap days 3.0 · days since last tag 15 · commits last 90 days 2,333 |
| 03.single_maintainer | no file says one person maintains itstatements 0 |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 10
Not a clean result. Each says why it could not answer here.
| Signal | Why |
|---|---|
| 06.print_logging | a frontend: console output is the browser's, not the server's |
| 06.alert_rules | no alert rules in the repository; they may live in a console |
| 06.feature_flags | no feature-flag service; flags may live elsewhere |
| 02.long_lived_branches | too few merges to judge (squash and rebase leave none) |
| 01.notebook_outputs | not a data or machine-learning repository |
| 05.secrets_in_history | no credential-shaped string was added outside test and fixture paths in the 20,000 most recent commits scanned; older history was not read |
| 05.cleartext_traffic | not a mobile app |
| 05.dataset_provenance | not a data or machine-learning repository |
| 05.license_manifest_conflict | no packaging manifest states a licence |
| 05.project_exploited | no affecting advisory is on CISA's Known Exploited list |
Anyone can check this report against the authoritative record — click the stamp, or enter XPK0-H8AK-R10E at borehole.dev/verify.
The code commits to the 106 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/XPK0H8AKR10E?via=badge)
A survey is a reading by a particular version of the assessor. Older readings are kept rather than replaced, because a verification mark attests to the survey it was issued for — overwriting one would make every code already in circulation read as tampered.
| Read | Assessor | Findings | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-03 · shown | borehole 0.7.11 | 19 | adequate |
16 other readings (show)
| 2026-10-04 | borehole 0.7.13 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-10-03 | borehole 0.7.12 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-10-02 | borehole 0.7.10 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-10-01 | borehole 0.7.9 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-09-30 | borehole 0.7.8 | 18 | adequate |
| 2026-09-29 | borehole 0.7.6 | 17 | adequate |
| 2026-09-28 | borehole 0.7.5 | 17 | adequate |
| 2026-09-28 | borehole 0.7.4 | 17 | adequate |
| 2026-09-27 | borehole 0.7.3 | 16 | adequate |
| 2026-09-27 | borehole 0.7.2 | 18 | adequate |
| 2026-09-27 | borehole 0.7.1 | 18 | adequate |
| 2026-09-26 | borehole 0.7.0 | 18 | adequate |
| 2026-09-26 | borehole 0.6.3 | 17 | adequate |
| 2026-09-26 | borehole 0.6.2 | 17 | adequate |
| 2026-09-25 | borehole 0.6.1 | 16 | adequate |
| 2026-09-25 | borehole 0.6.0 | 20 | adequate |
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 — 7 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 0.0s | read repository metadata from the GitHub API | authenticated: False |
| 86.6s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: full |
| 156.6s | read the git history | commits: 23206tracked files: 11004 |
| 596.0s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 596.1s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
| 928.2s | kept the facts, never the source, for re-reading under new checks | |
| 928.2s | deleting the working copy |
Total 928.2s ·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).