c14ac29 · 5,000 commits · 10,997 files
Issued 2026-09-23
Nothing significant. Questions worth asking about Security & Reliability Posture, Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance.
35 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. None found a significant problem; 3 raised something worth a question. 4 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 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.
- 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 | strong | |
| 03 | Organization & Key-Person Risk | strong | |
| 04 | Product & Engineering Maturity | adequate | |
| 05 | Security & Reliability Posture | adequate | |
| 06 | Observability & Operations | strong | |
| 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 ↑tests/unit_tests/sql/parse_tests.py is 6,683 lines, 63× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 105 lines. 201 files exceed 1,050 lines, the largest being 6,683. 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 | tests/unit_tests/sql/parse_tests.py:1 — 6,683 lines (63× median) |
| line-count | superset/security/manager.py:1 — 6,362 lines (60× median) |
| line-count | tests/integration_tests/dashboards/api_tests.py:1 — 6,020 lines (57× median) |
| line-count | tests/unit_tests/commands/report/execute_test.py:1 — 5,902 lines (56× median) |
| line-count | superset/models/helpers.py:1 — 5,802 lines (55× 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 ↑No finding. 7 checks ran and none fired; the rejection log below says why each did not.
Organization & Key-Person Risk
03 · strong · ratings ↑No finding. 5 checks ran and none fired; the rejection log below says why each did not.
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · adequate · ratings ↑142 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequatesuperset-frontend/package.json declares 142 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 — 142 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(s) run 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.
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 · strong · ratings ↑No finding. 3 checks ran and none fired; the rejection log below says why each did not.
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
2 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.
Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity
02 · high coverage- Incident response practice is not visible in a repository.
Organization & Key-Person Risk
03 · partial coverage- Hiring pipeline, bench depth and retention are not visible in a repository.
- Whether the dominant contributor is part of the transaction.
- Seniority, levelling and who actually mentors whom.
- Whether the team wants to stay after the deal closes.
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · minimal coverage- Roadmap credibility requires the data room.
- Whether technical debt is acknowledged and funded.
Security & Reliability Posture
05 · partial coverage- Incident history and failure-mode analysis are not in the repository.
Observability & Operations
06 · partial coverage- Whether anyone watches the telemetry that exists.
Fit with the Acquirer
07 · none coverageNot rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.
- This is a Python and TypeScript codebase. Does your engineering organisation already run Python and TypeScript in production, or would this be the first?
- 423 people have committed here. Which of them are you acquiring, and which are you replacing?
- The bulk of this system sits in superset/, superset-frontend/, tests/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- 78% 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?
- This deploys as a container or managed service. 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?
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/c14ac29)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 — 31 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 31 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 — 28
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few filesfiles 13,167 · top5 share 0.068 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 730 · per kloc 0.42 · lines read 1,754,726 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 0.402 · early test per code 0.364 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.339 · early delete per insert 0.118 |
| 06.telemetry_presence | a telemetry or error-reporting library is referencednote presence only; whether anyone watches it is not visible here · matches 40 |
| 06.structured_logging | a structured logging library is referencedmatches 9 |
| 06.healthcheck_presence | a health or readiness check is defined |
| 03.contributor_concentration | no single contributor dominates the historyauthors 423 · top share a quarter or more · bus factor 2 |
| 03.knowledge_silos | every substantial directory has been touched by more than one personauthors 423 · directories 15 |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | a healthy share of contributors committed more than onceshare 0.686 · authors 423 · one commit authors 290 |
| 03.contributor_attrition | the dominant contributor is still activeauthors 423 · top share a quarter or more · top contributor last committed within the last three months |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of change arrives through a reviewable pathmerges 0 · commits 5,000 · reviewed share 0.999 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 55 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 2,629 · source 6,905 · 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 7 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 16.06 · repeat share 0.0 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 13,167 · write once share 0.464 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.0128 · product files 5,012 · distinct blocks 590,541 |
| 05.committed_secrets | no credential-shaped strings outside test and fixture pathsnote the working tree only; history is scanned at --deep · patterns 7 · files read 8,731 |
| 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 1,403,210 |
| 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 — 3
Not a clean result. Each says why it could not answer here.
| Signal | Why |
|---|---|
| 03.active_contributors | history too short to distinguish active from historical contributors |
| 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 69DY-71QT-Q1JM at borehole.dev/verify.
The code commits to the 36 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/69DY71QTQ1JM?via=badge)
What this scan did with the repository — 5 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: 1138.5authenticated: False |
| 38.1s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: 5,000 commits |
| 60.7s | read the git history | commits: 5000tracked files: 10997 |
| 122.0s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: True |
| 122.1s | deleting the working copy |
Total 122.1s ·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).