b847309 · 20,585 commits · 13,883 files
Issued 2026-10-22
Nothing significant. Questions worth asking about Security & Reliability Posture, Product & Engineering Maturity.
104 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 1 finding is worth checking first. 19 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 04.62 Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
- 05.61 305 files are named as enterprise-edition code app/client/packages/mcp/src/ee/extensions/api.ts
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.
- 04.3 198 direct dependencies in a single manifest
- Words about people are today's: bands rather than exact shares, dates or day counts, and what the history measured rather than why.
- 2 findings from checks Borehole's calibration found wrong more often than right are no longer published.
| Dimension | Rating | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance | adequate | |
| 02 | Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | strong | |
| 03 | Organization & Key-Person Risk | adequate | |
| 04 | Product & Engineering Maturity | adequate | |
| 05 | Security & Reliability Posture | adequate | |
| 06 | Observability & Operations | adequate | |
| 07 | Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable |
- 14% 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
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
01 · adequate · ratings ↑1 base image floats: no version, or `latest`
adequate1 of 6 `FROM` lines in product Dockerfiles name an image without a version, or with `latest`. Each build pulls whatever the registry serves that day, so the image that ships can change without a commit, and last month's build cannot be reproduced. Pin a version, or a digest.
| deploy/heroku/Dockerfile | deploy/heroku/Dockerfile:2 — base 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.
app/client/src/components/editorComponents/PartialImportExport/PartialExportModal/unitTestUtils.ts is 20,770 lines, 391× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 53 lines. 93 files exceed 1,000 lines, the largest being 20,770. 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. Measured against its own codebase's median, it is larger than 97% of 382 surveyed projects' largest files.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| line-count | app/client/src/components/editorComponents/PartialImportExport/PartialExportModal/unitTestUtils.ts:1 — 20,770 lines (391× median) |
| line-count | app/client/public/libraries/jsonwebtoken@8.5.1.js:1 — 19,990 lines (377× median) |
| line-count | app/client/packages/mcp/src/app.ts:1 — 9,000 lines (169× median) |
| line-count | app/client/public/libraries/fast-csv@4.3.6.js:1 — 8,087 lines (152× median) |
| line-count | app/client/packages/design-system/widgets/src/components/Icon/src/icons.ts:1 — 5,402 lines (101× 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. 16 checks ran and none fired; the rejection log below says why each did not.
Organization & Key-Person Risk
03 · adequate · ratings ↑One person alone changes billing
adequateIn the last 24 months, of 61 contributors, a single person made every change to: billing (13 commits). These are the parts where a mistake is expensive and where knowledge is hardest to rebuild. Ask who else could change them safely tomorrow.
| git log -- <area> | sole author over 24 months: billing (13 commits) |
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.
Regular contributors fell from 41 to 10 in a year
adequate31 people who committed regularly the year before made no commits in the last year, and 5 new regular contributors arrived. Ask whether the work they did is still covered.
| regular contributors by year | 41 then 10; 31 stopped committing, 5 began |
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.
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · adequate · ratings ↑198 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequate worth checking firstapp/client/package.json declares 198 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.
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 app/client/package.json and the 3 other files it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| direct-dependencies | app/client/package.json — 198 declared |
| direct-dependencies | app/client/packages/design-system/ads/package.json — 26 declared |
| direct-dependencies | app/client/packages/design-system/widgets/package.json — 21 declared |
| direct-dependencies | app/client/packages/rts/package.json — 20 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.
4 jobs are each done by more than one library
adequateWithin a single package: HTTP clients: axios, got, node-fetch; dates: date-fns, dayjs, moment; forms: react-hook-form, redux-form; utility belts: lodash, underscore. Each duplicate is bundle size, two ways of doing the same thing in one codebase, and two upgrade paths to maintain. It is usually the residue of a migration that stopped halfway.
| app/client/package.json | app/client/package.json — several libraries per job |
| app/client/packages/ast/package.json | app/client/packages/ast/package.json — several libraries per job |
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.
26 files still carry code deprecated more than two years ago
adequate26 files were marked deprecated over two years ago and still are, the oldest since Dec 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.
| app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/controllers/ce/PageControllerCE.java | app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/controllers/ce/PageControllerCE.java — deprecated since Dec 2021 |
| app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/domains/User.java | app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/domains/User.java — deprecated since Jun 2022 |
| app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/domains/Workspace.java | app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/domains/Workspace.java — deprecated since Jun 2022 |
| app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/domains/UserData.java | app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/domains/UserData.java — deprecated since Jun 2022 |
| app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/acl/AclPermission.java | app/server/appsmith-server/src/main/java/com/appsmith/server/acl/AclPermission.java — deprecated since Aug 2022 |
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, v2.5.1, is not on the branch this survey read; the newest release on it is v1.43. 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.
| 8e430d61e | tag v2.5.1 |
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 ↑2 Dockerfiles 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 | Dockerfile — runs as root |
| no-USER-instruction | deploy/heroku/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.
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.
| app/client/packages/ast/rollup.config.js | app/client/packages/ast/rollup.config.js:14 — source maps in a production build |
| app/client/packages/design-system/widgets/rollup.config.js | app/client/packages/design-system/widgets/rollup.config.js:32 — source maps in a production build |
| app/client/packages/dsl/rollup.config.js | app/client/packages/dsl/rollup.config.js:15 — 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.
305 files are named as enterprise-edition code
adequateFiles named `.ee.` are, by the common open-core convention, the paid edition's code, usually under a licence that is not open source even where the rest is. What the buyer may do with each part differs.
| app/client/packages/mcp/src/ee/extensions/api.ts | app/client/packages/mcp/src/ee/extensions/api.ts — enterprise-edition file |
| app/client/packages/mcp/src/ee/extensions/capabilities.ts | app/client/packages/mcp/src/ee/extensions/capabilities.ts — enterprise-edition file |
| app/client/packages/mcp/src/ee/extensions/catalog.ts | app/client/packages/mcp/src/ee/extensions/catalog.ts — enterprise-edition 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
adequate18 third-party CI actions are referenced by a tag or branch rather than a commit, so they run whatever that tag points to on the day; 1 step pipes 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/ad-hoc-docker-image.yml | .github/workflows/ad-hoc-docker-image.yml:131 — action pinned by tag |
| .github/workflows/ad-hoc-docker-image.yml | .github/workflows/ad-hoc-docker-image.yml:134 — action pinned by tag |
| deploy/digital_ocean/scripts/01-packages.sh | deploy/digital_ocean/scripts/01-packages.sh:13 — 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.
13 SQL statements built from strings
adequate13 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.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| app/client/src/components/editorComponents/WidgetQueryGeneratorForm/DatasourceSpecificControls/GoogleSheetControls/SheetsDropdown/useSheets.tsx | app/client/src/components/editorComponents/WidgetQueryGeneratorForm/DatasourceSpecificControls/GoogleSheetControls/SheetsDropdown/useSheets.tsx:82 — SQL built from a string |
| app/server/appsmith-plugins/mysqlPlugin/src/main/java/com/external/utils/MySqlGetStructureUtils.java | app/server/appsmith-plugins/mysqlPlugin/src/main/java/com/external/utils/MySqlGetStructureUtils.java:156 — SQL built from a string |
| app/server/appsmith-plugins/mysqlPlugin/src/main/java/com/external/utils/MySqlGetStructureUtils.java | app/server/appsmith-plugins/mysqlPlugin/src/main/java/com/external/utils/MySqlGetStructureUtils.java:159 — 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.
31 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 18 high or critical
adequate31 of 3,331 locked dependencies match 43 published advisories in OSV, 18 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. This lockfile pins development tools alongside what ships and does not say which is which, so some of these may never reach a user.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| app/client/yarn.lock | app/client/yarn.lock — @storybook/core 8.2.7: GHSA-f2ph-cmg5-wxc8 (critical), fixed in 8.6.19 |
| app/client/yarn.lock | app/client/yarn.lock — storybook 8.2.7: GHSA-f2ph-cmg5-wxc8 (critical), fixed in 8.6.19 |
| app/client/yarn.lock | app/client/yarn.lock — braces 3.0.3: GHSA-vfj7-8cjw-p6xm (high) |
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.
24 places insert HTML from a variable without sanitising it
adequate24 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.
| app/client/public/tinymce/tinymce.min.js | app/client/public/tinymce/tinymce.min.js:835 — HTML from a variable |
| app/client/public/tinymce/tinymce.min.js | app/client/public/tinymce/tinymce.min.js:2396 — HTML from a variable |
| app/client/public/tinymce/tinymce.min.js | app/client/public/tinymce/tinymce.min.js:4542 — 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.
49 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 27 high or critical
adequateThe newest was published on 2026-10-06. 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 46 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 1.43.0. Answer lives in: the release you run, set against each fixed version. GHSA-xfc5-796c-7hr9 (moderate), CVE-2026-7299 (moderate), GHSA-7hf5-mc28-xmcv (critical) are fixed in the surveyed commit; which release carries them cannot be told from this history, which does not place the release users run. Answer lives in: the version you run.
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.
| GHSA-cfv8-wh7w-xx73 | 2026-10-06: GHSA-cfv8-wh7w-xx73 (moderate), fixed in 2.3: Git auto-commit progress endpoint discloses branch and progress state without checking caller authorization |
| GHSA-fqwc-g9wm-5895 | 2026-10-06: GHSA-fqwc-g9wm-5895 (critical), fixed in 2.3: Arbitrary file read and write via symlinks in Git import |
| GHSA-frqc-9x9h-fv9v | 2026-10-06: GHSA-frqc-9x9h-fv9v (moderate), fixed in 2.2: Cross-site scripting via CSS tokens in custom widgets |
| GHSA-rf99-rc2w-vh94 | 2026-09-29: GHSA-rf99-rc2w-vh94 (moderate), fixed in 2.4: MongoDB root credentials exposed via the admin environment settings endpoint |
| GHSA-h5qf-426x-5mv5 | 2026-09-17: GHSA-h5qf-426x-5mv5 (high), fixed in 2.3: Unauthorized workspace membership changes via incomplete authorization checks |
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 structured logging library is in use
adequateNothing references a structured logging library. Logs that are written to be read by a person are not searchable by a machine, which means incident response here is proportional to how well someone remembers the codebase rather than to what the tooling can find.
| logging-scan | searched 10,172 files for 10 structured logging libraries; 0 matched |
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.
Readiness and liveness probes are identical in 1 of 1 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.
| deploy/helm/templates/deployment.yaml | deploy/helm/templates/deployment.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.
1 of 1 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.
| deploy/helm/templates/autoupdate.yaml | deploy/helm/templates/autoupdate.yaml:22 — 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
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 No architecture or design document is in the tree, across 10,734 product files. Where does the design live, and who holds it?
- 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 352 people have committed here. Which of them are you acquiring, and which are you replacing?
- measured static/ (less than a quarter of the files) has not changed in 18 months while the rest of the repository moved. Is that code finished, or abandoned, and who still knows how it works?
- 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 416 commits landed in the last year, against 1,342 the year before (-69%). Is that maintenance mode, a pivot, or fewer people working on it? The count looks the same for all three.
- 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 05.5 found credential-shaped strings in this repository. Was each one revoked at the provider? Deleting it from the code revokes nothing; only the provider's audit log shows that it was.
- 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 Java alongside (27% 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 app/, deploy/, contributions/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- 57% of lines added in the last 12 months (4% 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 37 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/appsmithorg/appsmith/b847309)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 — 85 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 85 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 — 72
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few filesfiles 27,098 · top5 share 0.023 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 3,344 · per kloc 2.0 · lines read 1,669,432 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 0.665 · early test per code 0.419 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.53 · early delete per insert 0.464 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 635 · share 0.498 · with tests 316 |
| 04.fix_share_trend | fixing is not crowding out building |
| 04.compat_layers | little code is kept for the old wayshare 0.0 · code files 6,926 · compat files 3 |
| 06.telemetry_presence | a telemetry or error-reporting library is referencednote presence only; whether anyone watches it is not visible here · matches 67 |
| 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 True · request id sites 21 |
| 06.error_reporting | an error reporter is initialisedinitialised 1 · config files 0 |
| 06.usage_reporting_default | the product's code names no reporting hostsettings on 6 · settings off 5 |
| 06.environment_branching | environment differences live in configurationsites 0 |
| 06.release_markers | releases are markedtags last year 20 · release commits 0 · changelog commits 0 |
| 06.migrate_on_start | migrations do not run at container start |
| 06.feature_flags | a feature-flag service is configured and usedsdk files 3 · evaluation sites 10 |
| 03.contributor_concentration | no single contributor dominates the last 24 monthsyears 7.8 · window last 24 months · authors 352 |
| 03.active_contributors | more than one contributor active in the trailing yearall time 352 · active 12mo 21 |
| 03.knowledge_silos | every substantial directory has been touched by more than one personauthors 352 · directories 3 |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | an open contributor base, where one-commit contributors are normalauthors 352 · one off share 0.392 |
| 03.contributor_attrition | no contributor dominates enough for their absence to matterauthors 352 · top share less than a quarter · top contributor last committed more than a year ago |
| 03.second_contributor_attrition | the second and third contributors are still active |
| 03.bus_factor_trend | the team has not narrowed to one person |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of recent change carries evidence of reviewmerges 26 · window last 24 months · with tracked 288 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 62 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 2,222 · source 9,140 · test ratio 0.243 |
| 02.release_cadence | tags are presenttags 350 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry contentsampled 17,755 · low content share 0.004 |
| 02.branch_protection_hints | process scaffolding is present in the repository |
| 02.ci_runs_tests | CI invokes a test runnerconfigs 58 · with tests 14 |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 11 · test files 2,939 |
| 02.ci_test_gating | no test run in CI is written so that it cannot failconfigs 62 |
| 02.revert_share | change is rarely undoneshare 0.006 · reverts 10 · recent commits 1,763 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 2 · commits since 4 · days since lockfile changed 0 |
| 02.flaky_test_markers | tests are not retried until they passtest retries 0 · suite retries 0 |
| 02.lint_in_build | a linter or formatter runs in the buildwired 25 · ci configs 62 · product files 6,926 |
| 02.commit_size | changes arrive in reviewable sizesshare 0.025 · commits 1,607 · over 2000 lines 40 |
| 01.burst_import | the largest burst was merged pull requests, each developed and reviewed on its own branch (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 2902d6b..89e10ad · bursts explained 2 · largest net added 10,357 |
| 01.initial_dump | first commit is not a disproportionate share of the codebaseinsertions 45 · share of insertions 0.0 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 26.22 · repeat share 0.12 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 10,364 · write once share 0.453 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 1,679,190 · files 37 · per kloc 0.05 |
| 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 10,172 |
| 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_management_pattern | no environment file is committed outside tests and examplesenv files 0 |
| 05.migration_reversibility | migrations can be rolled backshare 0.0 · migrations 89 · irreversible 0 |
| 05.shell_from_strings | product code does not build shell commands from stringssites 0 |
| 05.unsafe_deserialization | no code-executing deserialiser in product codesites 0 |
| 05.tls_verification_off | no TLS verification is switched off in product codefiles 0 · sites 0 · pinned instead 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 600 |
| 05.license_vendored_unlicensed | no vendored third-party code is committedcomponents 0 |
| 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.flags_accumulating | few or no feature flags in the historylive 0 · retired 1 · flags seen 1 |
| 04.dependency_churn | few dependencies were added and dropped within 60 daysdependencies seen 294 · added in two years 89 · removed within 60 days 0 |
| 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 |
| 04.releases_stopped | releases keep pace with developmentmedian gap days 14.0 · days since last tag 2 · commits last 90 days 196 |
| 03.single_maintainer | no file says one person maintains itstatements 0 |
| 05.project_exploited | no affecting advisory is on CISA's Known Exploited listexploited 0 |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 13
Not a clean result. Each says why it could not answer here.
| Signal | Why |
|---|---|
| 04.schema_churn | no schema migrations to read |
| 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.single_replica | no Kubernetes deployments |
| 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.outbound_timeouts | not assessed for TypeScript or TSX or Java, the languages the product is written in: this check's patterns read other languages only |
| 05.resource_limits | no Kubernetes workload manifests |
| 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 |
| 04.api_versions_coexisting | one API version is served, or none |
| 05.project_advisories | could not tell whether 47 published advisories affect the surveyed code: its version is only known to be at least 1.43.0; 3 are fixed in the surveyed commit, and the release users run is not placed by this history |
Anyone can check this report against the authoritative record — click the stamp, or enter MS8X-V2JW-QDD6 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/MS8XV2JWQDD6?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 — 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 | size mb: 799.6authenticated: False |
| 52.8s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: full |
| 80.6s | read the git history | commits: 20585tracked files: 13883 |
| 455.1s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 455.1s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
| 710.6s | kept the facts, never the source, for re-reading under new checks | |
| 710.6s | deleting the working copy |
Total 710.6s ·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).