ae26954 · 24,626 commits · 9,458 files
Issued 2026-10-03
BUSL-1.1 since 2023-08-11: source available, not open source; production use restricted until the change date.
102 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 2 findings are worth checking first. 19 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 05.60 BUSL-1.1 since 2023-08-11: source available, not open source; production use restricted until the change date
Borehole's proprietary scoring is calibrated across hundreds of repositories. Each finding here reads significant, but its check has not yet held up often enough in that calibration to rate significant on its own. If one holds when someone checks it, it is significant.
- Words about people are today's: bands rather than exact shares, dates or day counts, and what the history measured rather than why.
- 4 findings from checks Borehole's calibration found wrong more often than right are no longer published.
- The file and line of 5 credential-shaped matches are withheld. File and line are shown to whoever GitHub says controls this repository, signed in, and to a buyer of this report.
| 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 | strong | |
| 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
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
01 · adequate · ratings ↑1 base image floats: no version, or `latest`
adequate1 of 3 `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.
| Dockerfile | Dockerfile:142 — 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.
vault/logical_system.go is 7,965 lines, 94× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 84 lines. 68 files exceed 1,000 lines, the largest being 7,965. Size is not a defect on its own — some problems genuinely live in one place — but these are where merge conflicts, review fatigue and single-owner knowledge concentrate, and they are the first thing that slows an inheriting engineer down.
A note that does not affect this rating: measured against its own codebase's median, it is below the 85th percentile of 382 surveyed projects' largest files, where this check begins to count.
| line-count | vault/logical_system.go:1 — 7,965 lines (94× median) |
| line-count | vault/core.go:1 — 5,177 lines (61× median) |
| line-count | vault/logical_system_paths.go:1 — 5,069 lines (60× median) |
| line-count | vault/token_store.go:1 — 4,496 lines (53× median) |
| line-count | vault/activity_log.go:1 — 3,631 lines (43× 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 (ui/playwright.config.ts). A retry turns a flaky test green without saying why it failed, so a green build means the tests passed eventually. Ask how many retries a typical run needs, and which tests need them.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| ui/playwright.config.ts | ui/playwright.config.ts:39 — 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 · adequate · ratings ↑Bus factor 1: recent work is concentrated in one contributor
adequateIn the last 24 months, one contributor authored more than half of 3,085 non-merge commits among 169 authors; across all history, less than a quarter of 22,135. In a project with 169 recent contributors and 12 years of history, that is a question about one person's role rather than a fragile team — but it is the question to ask.
| git shortlog -sn | last 24 months: top author more than half of 3,085 commits; bus factor 1; 169 authors |
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 bus factor fell from 15 to 1
adequateYear by year, newest first, the number of people who wrote half the changes was 1, 11, 12, 15. The team narrowed to one person, which is a different risk from one that always was: the code does not say why.
| bus factor by year | 1, 11, 12, 15 |
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 65 to 5 in a year
adequate51 people who committed regularly the year before made no commits in the last year, and 1 new regular contributors arrived. Ask whether the work they did is still covered.
| regular contributors by year | 65 then 5; 51 stopped committing, 1 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 ↑209 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequate worth checking firstgo.mod declares 209 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 go.mod and the 3 other files it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| direct-dependencies | go.mod — 209 declared |
| direct-dependencies | sdk/go.mod — 55 declared |
| direct-dependencies | internalshared/go.mod — 52 declared |
| direct-dependencies | ui/lib/pki/package.json — 31 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.
33 files still carry code deprecated more than two years ago
adequate33 files were marked deprecated over two years ago and still are, the oldest since Sep 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.
| sdk/database/dbplugin/database_grpc.pb.go | sdk/database/dbplugin/database_grpc.pb.go — deprecated since Sep 2021 |
| sdk/plugin/pb/backend.pb.go | sdk/plugin/pb/backend.pb.go — deprecated since Oct 2021 |
| builtin/credential/approle/path_role.go | builtin/credential/approle/path_role.go — deprecated since Oct 2021 |
| helper/identity/types.pb.go | helper/identity/types.pb.go — deprecated since Oct 2021 |
| sdk/helper/pluginutil/multiplexing.pb.go | sdk/helper/pluginutil/multiplexing.pb.go — deprecated since Feb 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, v2.1.1, is not on the branch this survey read; the newest release on it is v1.2.0. 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.
| d78bbbe2d | tag v2.1.1 |
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 ↑39 credential-shaped strings in the tree sit in tests, examples, documentation or local development settings
adequateStrings shaped like credentials appear only where fakes are usual: test fixtures, examples, documentation, placeholders and local stacks. They are almost always fakes. Ask someone to confirm that none of them works anywhere, because a real key in a development file is still a real key. 3 other matchs set aside: expired tokens, licence tokens a vendor verifies with a public key, or placeholder text where a key would go. None grants access to anything.
| AWS access key | 5 cited: AWS access key, where fakes are usual |
| File and line are shown to whoever GitHub says controls this repository, signed in, and to a buyer of this report. |
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.
33 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 13 high or critical in what ships
adequate worth checking first33 of 2,340 locked dependencies match 82 published advisories in OSV, 51 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 ui/pnpm-lock.yaml settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| ui/pnpm-lock.yaml | ui/pnpm-lock.yaml — websocket-driver 0.7.4: GHSA-xv26-6w52-cph6 (critical), fixed in 0.7.5; a development dependency |
| ui/pnpm-lock.yaml | ui/pnpm-lock.yaml — brace-expansion 1.1.15: GHSA-3jxr-9vmj-r5cp (high), fixed in 1.1.16 |
| ui/pnpm-lock.yaml | ui/pnpm-lock.yaml — brace-expansion 2.1.1: GHSA-3jxr-9vmj-r5cp (high), fixed in 2.1.2 |
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.
1 environment file is committed
adequateui/.env is tracked in git. Environment files are where credentials usually live, and committing one usually means nobody decided how secrets reach the running application. Whatever is in it is in the history for good. Check 05.1 says whether it holds anything credential-shaped.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| ui/.env | ui/.env — committed environment file |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
The build runs third-party code it does not pin
adequate1 third-party CI action is referenced by a tag or branch rather than a commit, so they run whatever that tag points to on the day; 2 steps pipe a download straight into a shell. Tags have been moved to malicious commits in real supply-chain attacks, and a piped script is whatever the server returns that minute. Pinning to a commit is the fix, and it is small.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| .github/workflows/mend-pr-scan.yml | .github/workflows/mend-pr-scan.yml:25 — action pinned by tag |
| .github/scripts/install-cob.sh | .github/scripts/install-cob.sh:42 — download piped into a shell |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
3 outbound calls can wait forever
adequate3 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.
| api/auth/gcp/gcp.go | api/auth/gcp/gcp.go:166 — outbound call without a timeout |
| builtin/credential/cert/backend.go | builtin/credential/cert/backend.go:188 — outbound call without a timeout |
| sdk/helper/testcluster/blackbox/session_ops.go | sdk/helper/testcluster/blackbox/session_ops.go:25 — 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.
24 SQL statements built from strings
adequate24 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.
| physical/cockroachdb/cockroachdb.go | physical/cockroachdb/cockroachdb.go:126 — SQL built from a string |
| physical/cockroachdb/cockroachdb.go | physical/cockroachdb/cockroachdb.go:129 — SQL built from a string |
| physical/cockroachdb/cockroachdb.go | physical/cockroachdb/cockroachdb.go:130 — 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.
The licence is BUSL-1.1: source available, not open source
adequateLICENSE grants BUSL-1.1: source available, not open source; production use restricted until the change date. 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 | LICENSE:1 — 92 lines, BUSL-1.1 |
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.
Relicensed: MPL-2.0 → BUSL-1.1 (2023-08-11)
adequateThe root licence changed 1 time(s). The latest terms restrict what users, hosts or a buyer may do in ways the earlier ones did not. Code taken under the old terms stays under them, so both matter in diligence.
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".
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.
30 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 15 high or critical
adequateThe newest was published on 2026-10-01. 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 25 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 1.2.0. Answer lives in: the release you run, set against each fixed version. GHSA-9g4h-h484-3578 (high), GHSA-8f82-53h8-2p34 (high), GHSA-g233-2p4r-3q7v (high) affect 1.2.0, the newest release in this history, and not the surveyed commit: their fixes are in the surveyed commit, and whether a release cut elsewhere carries them could not be told. Answer lives in: the version you run. The record is incomplete: NVD: 116 records name vault with nothing tying them to this repository (CVE-2004-2777, CVE-2007-4785, CVE-2010-4449, …).
A note that does not affect this rating: it describes the project's advisory record, and no advisory in it is known to affect the surveyed commit.
| CVE-2026-15911 | 2026-10-01: CVE-2026-15911 (high): Confluent Kafka Python client's HashiCorp Vault KMS integration could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper TLS certificate va |
| CVE-2026-63131 | 2026-09-23: CVE-2026-63131 (moderate): OpenBao is an open source identity-based secrets management system. Prior to 2.6.0, OpenBao's vault/policy/acl.go could evaluate a broader wildcard ACL grant be |
| CVE-2026-87993 | 2026-09-10: CVE-2026-87993 (high): The consul-template library is vulnerable to an information disclosure issue in its error handling path that may allow Vault secret values to appear in template |
| CVE-2026-5006 | 2026-08-24: CVE-2026-5006 (moderate): A vulnerability was identified in HashiCorp Vault and Vault Enterprise (“Vault”) such that an authenticated attacker may manipulate an identity value referenced |
| CVE-2026-8715 | 2026-08-13: CVE-2026-8715 (critical): Vault Secrets Operator 1.3.0 up to 1.4.1 is vulnerable to an arbitrary file read and credential exfiltration issue in the AppRole authentication configuration t |
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 error reporter is wired in
adequateNothing in the service initialises an error reporter (Sentry, Rollbar, Bugsnag, Honeybadger or an APM agent). An exception in production reaches a person only if someone is reading the logs, which usually means a customer reports it first.
A note that does not affect this rating: notes like it are common in well-run projects.
| error reporting | no error reporter initialised |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
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 7,024 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 1,497 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 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 Go codebase, with JavaScript alongside (34% of source files). Does your engineering organisation already run Go in production, or would this be the first?
- The bulk of this system sits in internalshared/, ui/, website/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- The repository carries deployment configuration (Dockerfile and 8 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/hashicorp/vault/ae26954)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 — 83 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 83 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 filesfiles 42,606 · top5 share 0.018 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 289 · per kloc 0.26 · lines read 1,098,056 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 0.585 · early test per code 0.558 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.648 · early delete per insert 0.347 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 405 · share 0.491 · with tests 199 |
| 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 3,158 · compat files 0 |
| 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 22 |
| 06.structured_logging | a structured logging library is referencedmatches 47 |
| 06.healthcheck_presence | a health or readiness check is defined |
| 06.telemetry_depth | the service is visible in more than one way |
| 06.print_logging | raw prints are few, or outnumbered by logger callsprints 5 · logger calls 1,481 |
| 06.correlation_ids | a request can be followed through the logstracing True · request id sites 44 |
| 06.usage_reporting_default | the product's code names no reporting hostsettings on 3 · settings off 4 |
| 06.environment_branching | environment differences live in configurationsites 7 |
| 06.release_markers | releases are markedtags last year 37 · release commits 7 · changelog commits 34 |
| 06.migrate_on_start | migrations do not run at container start |
| 03.active_contributors | more than one contributor active in the trailing yearall time 1,497 · active 12mo 26 |
| 03.knowledge_silos | every substantial directory has been touched by more than one personauthors 1,497 · directories 20 |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | an open contributor base, where one-commit contributors are normalauthors 1,497 · one off share 0.63 |
| 03.contributor_attrition | no contributor dominates enough for their absence to matterauthors 1,497 · top share less than a quarter · top contributor last committed more than three years ago |
| 03.critical_path_ownership | more than one person changes the critical pathsauthors 169 |
| 03.second_contributor_attrition | the second and third contributors are still active |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of recent change carries evidence of reviewmerges 1,235 · window last 24 months · with tracked 2 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 37 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 1,802 · source 4,917 · test ratio 0.366 |
| 02.release_cadence | tags are presenttags 486 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry contentsampled 22,182 · low content share 0.082 |
| 02.branch_protection_hints | process scaffolding is present in the repository |
| 02.ci_runs_tests | CI invokes a test runnerconfigs 37 · with tests 11 |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 0 · test files 1,907 |
| 02.ci_test_gating | no test run in CI is written so that it cannot failconfigs 37 |
| 02.revert_share | change is rarely undoneshare 0.008 · reverts 24 · recent commits 3,084 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 16 · commits since 1 · days since lockfile changed 0 |
| 02.lint_in_build | a linter or formatter runs in the buildwired 11 · ci configs 37 · product files 3,158 |
| 02.commit_size | changes arrive in reviewable sizesshare 0.021 · commits 2,814 · over 2000 lines 58 |
| 01.burst_import | the largest burst was a branch merged by a merge commit, developed on its own branch and landed in one piece (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 47a633b..b96015a · bursts explained 1 · largest net added 2,750 |
| 01.initial_dump | first commit is not a disproportionate share of the codebaseinsertions 389 · share of insertions 0.0 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 25.32 · repeat share 0.103 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 6,864 · write once share 0.464 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.0201 · product files 3,121 · distinct blocks 309,988 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 1,105,396 · files 0 · per kloc 0.0 |
| 01.unfinished_migration | JavaScript to TypeScript: the move is still under way: the new language's share rose in the last yearmigration JavaScript to TypeScript · new share now 0.503 · new share at start 0.0 |
| 01.weights_in_git | no model weights are committedfiles 0 |
| 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.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.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.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 39 |
| 05.license_vendored_unlicensed | no vendored third-party code is committedcomponents 0 |
| 05.committed_native_libraries | no widely used compiled library is committed to the productlibraries 0 |
| 04.dependency_churn | few dependencies were added and dropped within 60 daysdependencies seen 400 · added in two years 64 · 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.paid_edition | no directory carries a separate paid-edition licencedirectories 0 |
| 04.releases_stopped | releases keep pace with developmentmedian gap days 10.5 · days since last tag 1 · commits last 90 days 911 |
| 03.single_maintainer | no file says one person maintains itstatements 0 |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 18
Not a clean result. Each says why it could not answer here.
| Signal | Why |
|---|---|
| 04.schema_churn | no schema migrations to read |
| 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 |
| 06.feature_flags | no feature-flag service; flags may live elsewhere |
| 01.notebook_outputs | not a data or machine-learning repository |
| 05.migration_reversibility | too few migrations to judge |
| 05.resource_limits | no Kubernetes workload manifests |
| 05.public_env_secret | not a frontend |
| 05.unsafe_html | not a frontend |
| 05.source_maps_shipped | not a frontend |
| 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 | few or no feature flags in the history |
| 04.api_versions_coexisting | one API version is served, or none |
| 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 BYX6-1NMG-Y3CJ 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/BYX61NMGY3CJ?via=badge)
A survey is a reading by a particular version of the assessor. Older readings are kept rather than replaced, because a verification mark attests to the survey it was issued for — overwriting one would make every code already in circulation read as tampered.
| Read | Assessor | Findings | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-03 · shown | borehole 0.7.11 | 23 | adequate |
7 other readings (show)
| 2026-10-04 | borehole 0.7.13 | 23 | adequate |
| 2026-10-03 | borehole 0.7.12 | 23 | adequate |
| 2026-10-02 | borehole 0.7.10 | 23 | adequate |
| 2026-10-01 | borehole 0.7.9 | 22 | significant findings |
| 2026-09-30 | borehole 0.7.8 | 21 | adequate |
| 2026-09-29 | borehole 0.7.6 | 20 | adequate |
| 2026-09-29 | borehole 0.7.5 | 20 | adequate |
Where this scan ran
This scan ran on ordinary cloud infrastructure (cloud-run), not in a hardware-isolated confidential VM. Nothing about it is attested by Google.
What an attested survey proves, and what it does not.
What this scan did with the repository — 7 steps
Written by the steps themselves as they ran, not described afterwards. A hand-written account of a data flow drifts the first time somebody changes the flow and not the account.
| At | Step | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| 0.0s | read repository metadata from the GitHub API | authenticated: False |
| 49.0s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: full |
| 92.9s | read the git history | commits: 24626tracked files: 9458 |
| 526.5s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 526.5s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
| 800.3s | kept the facts, never the source, for re-reading under new checks | |
| 800.3s | deleting the working copy |
Total 800.3s ·source content sent off this machine: none · calls to a language model: 0 · the clone was deleted when the survey ended
An automated reading of a repository's code and its history up to one commit, with public advisory records. It may be wrong, it is not legal, financial, investment or security advice, and it does not replace diligence by a qualified person. It is provided for information: nobody may rely on it (Borehole's terms, section 3).