051c2f1 · 50,000 commits · 21,967 files
Issued 2026-10-22
FSL-1.1-ALv2 since 2024-02-27: source available, not open source; a competing commercial product or service is not allowed; each version becomes Apache-2.0 two years after its release.
103 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 1 finding is worth checking first. 13 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 05.60 FSL-1.1-ALv2 since 2024-02-27: source available, not open source; a competing commercial product or service is not allowed; each version becomes Apache-2.0 two years after its release
- 05.66 The licence is FSL-1.1-ALv2: source available, not open source LICENSE.md:1
- 05.60 Relicensed: BUSL-1.1 → FSL-1.0-ALv2 (2023-11-17) → FSL-1.1-ALv2 (2024-02-27) LICENSE
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, 6 high or critical in what ships
- 3 findings from checks Borehole's calibration found wrong more often than right are no longer published.
| Dimension | Rating | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance | strong | |
| 02 | Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | strong | |
| 03 | Organization & Key-Person Risk | not assessable | |
| 04 | Product & Engineering Maturity | adequate | |
| 05 | Security & Reliability Posture | adequate | |
| 06 | Observability & Operations | adequate | |
| 07 | Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable |
- 17% 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 ↑src/sentry/api/helpers/android_models.py is 24,570 lines, 307× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 80 lines. 140 files exceed 1,000 lines, the largest being 24,570. 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 96% 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 | src/sentry/api/helpers/android_models.py:1 — 24,570 lines (307× median) |
| line-count | src/sentry/migrations/0001_squashed_1118_add_group_derived_data.py:1 — 10,453 lines (130× median) |
| line-count | src/sentry/options/defaults.py:1 — 4,707 lines (58× median) |
| line-count | src/sentry/api/urls.py:1 — 3,971 lines (49× median) |
| line-count | src/sentry/conf/server.py:1 — 3,690 lines (46× 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 (.github/workflows/scripts/test_pytest_selected.py). 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.
| .github/workflows/scripts/test_pytest_selected.py | .github/workflows/scripts/test_pytest_selected.py:286 — 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 · not assessable · ratings ↑Not rated: only 4 of 10 checks could reach a conclusion here; the rest do not apply to this repository or could not read it. What a person adds here.
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · adequate · ratings ↑121 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequatestatic/app/package.json declares 121 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 | static/app/package.json — 121 declared |
| direct-dependencies | pyproject.toml — 113 declared |
| direct-dependencies | package.json — 38 declared |
| direct-dependencies | static/gsApp/package.json — 26 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 ↑7 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 6 high or critical in what ships
adequate worth checking first7 of 1,893 locked dependencies match 13 published advisories in OSV, 8 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 pnpm-lock.yaml and the 1 other file it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| pnpm-lock.yaml | pnpm-lock.yaml — dompurify 3.4.16: GHSA-cg2g-xh64-v4q7 (critical), fixed in 3.4.17 |
| pnpm-lock.yaml | pnpm-lock.yaml — handlebars 4.7.9: GHSA-8r5x-fm3f-whwj (critical), fixed in 4.7.10; a development dependency |
| uv.lock | uv.lock — djangorestframework 3.17.2: GHSA-33wh-fxxf-88vv (high), fixed in 3.18.2 |
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.
16 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 10 high or critical
adequateThe newest was published on 2026-10-21. A project that publishes advisories is telling its users about its fixes, and the count and pace say how much security work it carries. The record is incomplete: NVD: 36 records name sentry with nothing tying them to this repository (CVE-2004-0193, CVE-2012-2604, CVE-2012-2605, …).
| CVE-2026-114139 | 2026-10-21: CVE-2026-114139 (critical): Sentry-Javascript is an official Sentry SDKs for JavaScript. From 9.36.0 until 9.47.2, 10.75.2, and 11.0.0-rc.1, the webpack integration for @sentry/nextjs skip |
| GHSA-88p9-44cg-fr2q | 2026-10-19: GHSA-88p9-44cg-fr2q (high), fixed in 26.10.0: Improper email matching in SAML SSO process allows account takeover |
| GHSA-rrcx-889m-5jj5 | 2026-08-17: GHSA-rrcx-889m-5jj5 (critical), fixed in 26.8.0: Improper authentication on SAML SSO allows unauthorized organization member addition or identity linking |
| GHSA-w699-8wff-fqxw | 2026-07-24: GHSA-w699-8wff-fqxw (critical), fixed in 26.7.2: Improper authentication on SAML SSO process allows user identity linking |
| GHSA-xm86-7c47-gjm4 | 2026-07-16: GHSA-xm86-7c47-gjm4 (critical), fixed in 26.7.0: Unsafe pickle deserialization in Relocation Feature |
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.
11 outbound calls can wait forever
adequate11 HTTP calls use a client with no timeout (Python `requests` without `timeout=`, or Go's default client). When a dependency slows down, each one holds a worker until the connection gives up, and enough of them take the service down with the dependency.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| bin/extension_language_map.py | bin/extension_language_map.py:8 — outbound call without a timeout |
| src/sentry/integrations/utils/atlassian_connect.py | src/sentry/integrations/utils/atlassian_connect.py:146 — outbound call without a timeout |
| src/sentry/middleware/integrations/tasks.py | src/sentry/middleware/integrations/tasks.py:97 — outbound call without a timeout |
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 SQL statements built from strings
adequate2 places in product code build SQL by formatting or joining strings rather than passing parameters. 1 of them put a value into the string; in the rest, what the code shows going in is a table or column name, a constant, or something the line does not show. 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.
| src/sentry/api/paginator.py | src/sentry/api/paginator.py:46 — SQL built from a string |
| src/sentry/backup/services/import_export/impl.py | src/sentry/backup/services/import_export/impl.py:334 — 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.
8 deserialisers that can run code
adequate8 places read data with a deserialiser that executes what it reads (pickle). 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.
| src/sentry/buffer/redis.py | src/sentry/buffer/redis.py:555 — code-executing deserialiser |
| src/sentry/buffer/redis.py | src/sentry/buffer/redis.py:568 — code-executing deserialiser |
| src/sentry/digests/codecs.py | src/sentry/digests/codecs.py:19 — 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.
13 places insert HTML from a variable without sanitising it
adequate13 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.
| src/sentry/templates/sentry/error-page-embed.js | src/sentry/templates/sentry/error-page-embed.js:69 — HTML from a variable |
| static/app/components/backendJsonFormAdapter/tableAdapter.tsx | static/app/components/backendJsonFormAdapter/tableAdapter.tsx:139 — HTML from a variable |
| static/app/components/core/markdown/defaultComponents.tsx | static/app/components/core/markdown/defaultComponents.tsx:79 — 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.
3 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.
| src/sentry/static/sentry/vendor/fonts | src/sentry/static/sentry/vendor/fonts — 3 tracked files, no licence file |
| src/sentry/static/sentry/vendor/jquery.2.2.4.min.js | src/sentry/static/sentry/vendor/jquery.2.2.4.min.js — 1 tracked files, no licence file |
| src/sentry/static/sentry/vendor/select2.css | src/sentry/static/sentry/vendor/select2.css — 1 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.
The licence is FSL-1.1-ALv2: source available, not open source
adequateLICENSE.md grants FSL-1.1-ALv2: source available, not open source; a competing commercial product or service is not allowed; each version becomes Apache-2.0 two years after its release. The reading comes from the licence's own title and clauses. Whether the terms fit the buyer's intended use, and whether any paid licence transfers with the code, is a question for counsel and the licensor.
A note that does not affect this rating: it names the project's licence, a fact for the first screen rather than a weakness.
| LICENSE.md | LICENSE.md:1 — 105 lines, FSL-1.1-ALv2 |
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.
Relicensed: BUSL-1.1 → FSL-1.0-ALv2 (2023-11-17) → FSL-1.1-ALv2 (2024-02-27)
adequateThe root licence changed 2 time(s). Code taken under earlier terms stays under them; check which terms any fork or customer relied on.
A note that does not affect this rating: a licence change is a fact for the first screen, and only a narrowing of rights within two years of the surveyed commit costs "strong".
| 97760176c | LICENSE — BUSL-1.1 from 2020-12-15 |
| d4d89e2fa | LICENSE — FSL-1.0-ALv2 from 2023-11-17 |
| 1760ab3c6 | LICENSE.md — FSL-1.1-ALv2 from 2024-02-27 |
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 ↑Sends usage data to stats.stackexchange.com by default
adequatesrc/sentry/search/events/datasets/discover.py sends to stats.stackexchange.com, and src/sentry/api/serializers/models/project.py leaves reporting on as shipped. Every installation reports to the vendor unless its operator turns this off. For a buyer running it inside their own product, that is an outbound data flow to a third party: ask what is sent, how often, and whether the buyer's customers were told.
| src/sentry/search/events/datasets/discover.py | src/sentry/search/events/datasets/discover.py:245 — reports to stats.stackexchange.com |
| src/sentry/api/serializers/models/project.py | src/sentry/api/serializers/models/project.py:1135 — the reporting setting is on by default |
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
4 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 13,091 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 coverageNot rated: only 4 of 10 checks could reach a conclusion here; the rest do not apply to this repository or could not read it.
- measured 380 people have committed here. Which of them are you acquiring, and which are you replacing?
- Who mentors whom, and would that survive a departure?
- Can the team grow, and who stands behind the top three contributors?
- Is the seniority mix sound, and will pay survive your salary bands?
- Is the pace sustainable? Commit times cannot say: git keeps no reliable local time.
- Does the team want to stay after close?
- How are decisions made and disagreements resolved?
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · minimal coverage- Can this team deliver the stated roadmap on the stated timeline?
- Does leadership know about the debt, and is time budgeted to repay it?
- Is the engineering shape consistent with the commercial story?
Security & Reliability Posture
05 · partial coverage- measured No threat model is in the tree of what looks like a running service. Does one exist elsewhere, and who owns it?
- What has actually broken, how often, and how badly?
- What did external testing find, and was it fixed?
- What is the SOC 2, ISO 27001 or GDPR status, and where is the evidence?
Observability & Operations
06 · partial coverage- measured Backup or restore tooling is in the tree (src/sentry/backup/__init__.py). Has a restore ever been rehearsed, and how long did it take?
- 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 (40% 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 static/, src/, bin/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- The repository carries deployment configuration (self-hosted/Dockerfile). 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/getsentry/sentry/051c2f1)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 — 90 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 90 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 — 65
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few files, in the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026)files 41,686 · top5 share 0.021 · history read the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 2,024 · per kloc 0.88 · lines read 2,306,659 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code written, in the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026)history read the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) · late test per code 0.777 · early test per code 0.539 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new work, in the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026)history read the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) · late delete per insert 0.737 · early delete per insert 0.688 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 10,792 · share 0.483 · with tests 5,210 |
| 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 98 |
| 04.compat_layers | little code is kept for the old wayshare 0.001 · code files 12,019 · compat files 13 |
| 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 4,527 |
| 06.structured_logging | a structured logging library is referencedmatches 6 |
| 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 321 |
| 06.error_reporting | an error reporter is initialisedinitialised 116 · config files 0 |
| 06.environment_branching | environment differences live in configurationsites 0 |
| 06.release_markers | releases are markedtags last year 26 · release commits 21 · changelog commits 108 |
| 06.migrate_on_start | migrations do not run at container start |
| 06.feature_flags | a feature-flag service is configured and usedsdk files 11 · evaluation sites 2 |
| 03.contributor_concentration | no single contributor dominates the last 24 monthswindow last 24 months · authors 380 · top share less than a quarter |
| 03.critical_path_ownership | more than one person changes the critical pathsauthors 333 |
| 03.joiners_and_leavers | the team is not shrinkingleft 37 · joined 67 · regular last year 201 |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of recent change carries evidence of reviewmerges 45 · window last 24 months · with tracked 590 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 82 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 6,122 · source 18,128 · test ratio 0.338 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry content, in the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026)sampled 49,939 · history read the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) · 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 82 · with tests 22 |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 2 · test files 8,062 |
| 02.ci_test_gating | no test run in CI is written so that it cannot failconfigs 82 |
| 02.revert_share | change is rarely undoneshare 0.001 · reverts 47 · recent commits 36,544 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 2 · commits since 10 · days since lockfile changed 0 |
| 02.lint_in_build | a linter or formatter runs in the buildwired 19 · ci configs 82 · product files 12,019 |
| 02.long_lived_branches | the typical branch reaches the trunk quicklyshare 0.0 · merges 45 · long lived 0 |
| 02.commit_size | changes arrive in reviewable sizesshare 0.009 · commits 34,076 · over 2000 lines 303 |
| 01.burst_import | the largest burst was separate fixes, each for its own tracked issue, landed together (83% 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 it, in the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026)history read the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) · largest commits 998394c..adb16b1 · bursts explained 1 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and length, in the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026)history read the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) · length stdev 15.09 · repeat share 0.001 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.011 · product files 11,957 · distinct blocks 1,249,761 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 2,321,511 · files 201 · per kloc 0.12 |
| 01.build_reproducibility | every base image names a versionfloating 0 · from lines 7 |
| 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 paths; the only other matches are expired or licence tokens or placeholders, which grant nothingnote the working tree only; the history is 05.5 · patterns 8 · files read 14,871 |
| 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 1 |
| 05.secrets_management_pattern | no environment file is committed outside tests and examplesenv files 0 |
| 05.supply_chain_pinning | third-party build steps are pinned, or fewaction refs 168 · pipe to shell 0 · unpinned third party 0 |
| 05.migration_reversibility | migrations can be rolled backshare 0.0 · migrations 217 · irreversible 0 |
| 05.shell_from_strings | product code does not build shell commands from stringssites 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.source_maps_shipped | production builds do not publish source mapssites 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 7 |
| 05.committed_native_libraries | no widely used compiled library is committed to the productlibraries 0 |
| 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.paid_edition | no directory carries a separate paid-edition licencedirectories 0 |
| 04.releases_stopped | releases keep pace with developmentmedian gap days 8.0 · days since last tag 0 · commits last 90 days 5,843 |
| 04.release_branch | the newest release was cut from the branch surveyed, in the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026)elsewhere 0 · on branch 57 · history read the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) |
| 03.single_maintainer | no file says one person maintains itstatements 0 |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 25
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.deployed_image_floats | no deployment descriptor names an image |
| 06.probes_identical | no Kubernetes probes |
| 06.single_replica | no Kubernetes deployments |
| 03.active_contributors | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 03.knowledge_silos | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 03.contributor_attrition | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 03.second_contributor_attrition | not assessed: the history read covers 1016 days, less than the 1095 this check needs; only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 03.bus_factor_trend | not assessed: the history read covers 1016 days, less than the 1095 this check needs; only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 02.release_cadence | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 01.initial_dump | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 01.revision_depth | not assessed: this check needs the whole history, and only the most recent 50,000 commits (10 Jan 2024 to 22 Oct 2026) were read |
| 01.notebook_outputs | not a data or machine-learning repository |
| 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.flags_accumulating | the history scanned covers 8 months, less than the 12 this question needs |
| 04.api_versions_coexisting | the history scanned covers 8 months, less than the 18 this question needs |
| 04.deprecations_lingering | the history scanned covers 8 months, less than the 24 this question needs |
| 04.dependency_churn | the history scanned covers 8 months, less than the 24 this question needs |
| 04.ci_platforms_dropped | the history scanned covers 8 months, less than the 24 this question needs |
| 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 FSB4-NS17-6X4P 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/FSB4NS176X4P?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: 950.9authenticated: False |
| 149.5s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: full |
| 235.5s | read the git history | commits: 50000tracked files: 21967 |
| 1003.3s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 1003.4s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
| 1650.0s | kept the facts, never the source, for re-reading under new checks | |
| 1650.0s | deleting the working copy |
Total 1650.0s ·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).