2b35144 · 14,419 commits · 14,914 files
Issued 2026-10-23
Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition since 2024-09-09: source available, not open source; some uses need a commercial licence from the licensor.
104 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 1 finding is worth checking first. 18 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 05.60 Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition since 2024-09-09: source available, not open source; some uses need a commercial licence from the licensor
- 04.62 Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
- 05.66 The licence is Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition: source available, not open source LICENSE:1
- 05.60 Relicensed: Apache-2.0 → Apache-2.0 with terms on offering it as a service (2023-07-28) → Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition and terms on offering it as a service (2024-03-04) → Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition (2024-09-09) LICENSE
- states a policy on AI-generated contributions CONTRIBUTING.md:76
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 16 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 5 high or critical in what ships
- 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 | adequate | |
| 03 | Organization & Key-Person Risk | strong | |
| 04 | Product & Engineering Maturity | adequate | |
| 05 | Security & Reliability Posture | adequate | |
| 06 | Observability & Operations | adequate | |
| 07 | Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable |
- 32% 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 · adequate · ratings ↑1 base image floats: no version, or `latest`
adequate1 of 13 `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.
| docker/couchbase-server/Dockerfile | docker/couchbase-server/Dockerfile:1 — 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.
web/i18n/resources.generated.d.ts is 6,671 lines, 79× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 84 lines. 92 files exceed 1,000 lines, the largest being 6,671. 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 | web/i18n/resources.generated.d.ts:1 — 6,671 lines (79× median) |
| line-count | api/services/skill_management_service.py:1 — 4,900 lines (58× median) |
| line-count | api/controllers/console/knowledge_fs/resources.py:1 — 4,253 lines (50× median) |
| line-count | api/services/knowledge/dataset_service.py:1 — 3,963 lines (47× median) |
| line-count | api/services/knowledge_fs/product_dto.py:1 — 3,940 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 · adequate · ratings ↑6% of recent commits change more than 2,000 lines
adequate536 of 9530 commits in the last 24 months changed over 2,000 lines of code, not counting reformatting, renames, vendored or generated code. A change that size is rarely reviewed line by line. Ask how they were reviewed, and what made them that large.
| git log --numstat | 536 commits over 2,000 lines |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
Organization & Key-Person Risk
03 · strong · ratings ↑No finding. 10 checks ran and none fired; the rejection log below says why each did not.
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · adequate · ratings ↑102 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequateweb/package.json declares 102 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 | web/package.json — 102 declared |
| direct-dependencies | api/pyproject.toml — 42 declared |
| direct-dependencies | packages/tooling/package.json — 24 declared |
| direct-dependencies | cli/package.json — 9 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.
2 jobs are each done by more than one library
adequateWithin a single package: dates: date-fns, dayjs; state management: jotai, zustand. 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.
| packages/dify-ui/package.json | packages/dify-ui/package.json — several libraries per job |
| packages/jotai-tanstack-form/package.json | packages/jotai-tanstack-form/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.
Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
adequateThe newest pre-release, 2.0.0-beta.2, is not on the branch this survey read; the newest release on it is 1.18.0. 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.
| 2a8483299 | tag 2.0.0-beta.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.
Security & Reliability Posture
05 · adequate · ratings ↑1 Dockerfile runs 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 | docker/couchbase-server/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.
16 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 5 high or critical in what ships
adequate worth checking first16 of 2,017 locked dependencies match 72 published advisories in OSV, 40 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 api/uv.lock and the 1 other file it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| api/uv.lock | api/uv.lock — chromadb 0.5.20: GHSA-36p7-vc44-83pf (critical) |
| dify-agent/uv.lock | dify-agent/uv.lock — pillow 12.3.0: GHSA-332p-7hrc-92wf (critical), fixed in 13.0.0; an optional extra |
| api/uv.lock | api/uv.lock — pydantic-ai-slim 2.31.0: GHSA-6fqq-452j-qhrp (high), fixed in 2.53.0 |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
2 workload settings can give a container the host, behind a chart value or in a stack built from source
adequate2 places run a container privileged or in the host's namespaces only when a Helm value switches them on, or in a compose file that builds the product from this repository, which is how it is developed rather than how it ships. Neither is on by default in what ships. Ask whether production sets the value or runs that stack.
| docker/docker-compose-template.yaml | docker/docker-compose-template.yaml:1343 — host access behind a setting or in a local stack |
| docker/docker-compose.yaml | docker/docker-compose.yaml:1349 — host access behind a setting or in a local stack |
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.
| cli/vite.config.ts | cli/vite.config.ts:23 — source maps in a production build |
| packages/dev-proxy/vite.config.ts | packages/dev-proxy/vite.config.ts:11 — source maps in a production build |
| packages/migrate-no-unchecked-indexed-access/vite.config.ts | packages/migrate-no-unchecked-indexed-access/vite.config.ts:11 — 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.
38 SQL statements built from strings
adequate38 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.
| api/services/plugin/plugin_migration.py | api/services/plugin/plugin_migration.py:228 — SQL built from a string |
| api/extensions/storage/clickzetta_volume/volume_permissions.py | api/extensions/storage/clickzetta_volume/volume_permissions.py:269 — SQL built from a string |
| api/providers/vdb/vdb-alibabacloud-mysql/src/dify_vdb_alibabacloud_mysql/alibabacloud_mysql_vector.py | api/providers/vdb/vdb-alibabacloud-mysql/src/dify_vdb_alibabacloud_mysql/alibabacloud_mysql_vector.py:175 — 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.
2 deserialisers that can run code
adequate2 places read data with a deserialiser that executes what it reads (pickle, `yaml.load` without a safe loader). 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.
| api/models/dataset.py | api/models/dataset.py:740 — code-executing deserialiser |
| api/services/agent/roster_package_reader.py | api/services/agent/roster_package_reader.py:352 — 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.
The licence is Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition: source available, not open source
adequateLICENSE grants Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition: source available, not open source; some uses need a commercial licence from the licensor. 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 — 22 lines, Apache-2.0 AND LicenseRef-Terms-CommercialLicence |
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: Apache-2.0 → Apache-2.0 with terms on offering it as a service (2023-07-28) → Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition and terms on offering it as a service (2024-03-04) → Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition (2024-09-09)
adequateThe root licence changed 3 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".
| db896255d | LICENSE — Apache-2.0 from 2023-05-15 |
| c98311b32 | LICENSE — Apache-2.0 with terms on offering it as a service from 2023-07-28 |
| 83a6b0c62 | LICENSE — Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition and terms on offering it as a service from 2024-03-04 |
| 3ff9a1f24 | LICENSE — Apache-2.0 with a commercial-licence condition from 2024-09-09 |
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.
36 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 18 high or critical
adequateThe newest was published on 2026-09-03. 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 6 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 1.18.0. Answer lives in: the release you run, set against each fixed version. The record is incomplete: NVD: 6 records name dify with nothing tying them to this repository (CVE-2025-0185, CVE-2026-18266, CVE-2026-18632, …).
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-2026-85021 | 2026-09-03: CVE-2026-85021 (low): A vulnerability was determined in langgenius dify 1.13.0. Affected is the function router.replace of the file web/app/(shareLayout)/components/splash.tsx of the |
| CVE-2026-85022 | 2026-09-03: CVE-2026-85022 (low): A vulnerability was identified in langgenius dify 1.13.0. Affected by this vulnerability is the function router.replace of the file web/app/(shareLayout)/webapp |
| GHSA-ccrj-frp2-c945 | 2026-08-19: GHSA-ccrj-frp2-c945 (high), fixed in 1.16.0: IDOR in AppMCPServer PUT Endpoint Allows Modification of Other Apps' MCP Servers |
| GHSA-9c9q-5rj5-mjj2 | 2026-07-15: GHSA-9c9q-5rj5-mjj2 (high), fixed in 1.14.2: Cross-Tenant File Preview via Unscoped Console `file_id` |
| GHSA-fj5w-7rc8-3f3f | 2026-07-15: GHSA-fj5w-7rc8-3f3f (moderate), fixed in 1.14.0: Cross-Tenant External API Usage Enumeration |
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 10,193 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.
9 of 41 deployed images carry no version, or `latest`
adequate9 images in the deployment configuration are named without a version or as `latest`. A redeploy can change the software without a commit, a rollback has nothing to roll back to, and nobody can say from the repository what is running.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| docker/docker-compose.yaml | docker/docker-compose.yaml:254 — image without a version |
| docker/docker-compose.yaml | docker/docker-compose.yaml:895 — image without a version |
| docker/docker-compose.yaml | docker/docker-compose.yaml:920 — 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.
The code branches on the environment's name at 11 places
adequate11 places outside configuration test whether they are running in production or staging. Staging then does not exercise production's code, and each deploy is the first run of those branches. Differences belong in configuration the code reads, not in the code.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| api/models/knowledge_fs_cutover.py | api/models/knowledge_fs_cutover.py:80 — branch on the environment name |
| web/app/components/base/analytics-consent/cloud-analytics.tsx | web/app/components/base/analytics-consent/cloud-analytics.tsx:1 — branch on the environment name |
| web/app/components/base/analytics-consent/cloud-analytics.tsx | web/app/components/base/analytics-consent/cloud-analytics.tsx:18 — branch on the environment name |
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
6 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 9,763 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 1,514 people have committed here. Which of them are you acquiring, and which are you replacing?
- Who mentors whom, and would that survive a departure?
- Can the team grow, and who stands behind the top three contributors?
- Is the seniority mix sound, and will pay survive your salary bands?
- Is the pace sustainable? Commit times cannot say: git keeps no reliable local time.
- Does the team want to stay after close?
- How are decisions made and disagreements resolved?
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · minimal coverage- measured 6,374 commits landed in the last year, against 3,841 the year before (+66%). What drove it: new people, a deadline, or code produced faster than before?
- measured Experiment tracking is configured (mlflow, wandb). Can the model that ships be tied to the run, data and code that produced it?
- measured No model card is in the tree. What is the model's intended use, what was it trained on, and where does it fail?
- Can this team deliver the stated roadmap on the stated timeline?
- Does leadership know about the debt, and is time budgeted to repay it?
- Is the engineering shape consistent with the commercial story?
Security & Reliability Posture
05 · partial coverage- measured No threat model is in the tree of what looks like a running service. Does one exist elsewhere, and who owns it?
- What has actually broken, how often, and how badly?
- What did external testing find, and was it fixed?
- What is the SOC 2, ISO 27001 or GDPR status, and where is the evidence?
Observability & Operations
06 · partial coverage- measured Nothing in the tree backs up or restores data. How is data backed up, and has a restore ever been rehearsed?
- measured No alert rule is defined in the repository. Where are alerts defined, who receives them, and when did one last fire?
- Are the dashboards opened, the alerts acknowledged and the pages answered?
- Are the service-level objectives actually met?
- Who carries the pager, and how often does it go off?
- What does it cost to run, and how much headroom is there?
Fit with the Acquirer
07 · none coverageNot rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.
- This is primarily a TypeScript codebase, with Python alongside (37% 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 web/, api/, packages/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- The repository carries deployment configuration (api/Dockerfile and 14 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/langgenius/dify/2b35144)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 — 86 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 86 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 — 69
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few filesfiles 33,700 · top5 share 0.01 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 135 · per kloc 0.07 · lines read 1,825,797 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 1.188 · early test per code 0.059 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.698 · early delete per insert 0.341 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 4,298 · share 0.377 · with tests 1,620 |
| 04.fix_share_trend | fixing is not crowding out building |
| 04.schema_churn | columns, once added, staydropped within 90 days 0 · columns added last year 11 |
| 04.compat_layers | little code is kept for the old wayshare 0.0 · code files 6,917 · compat files 2 |
| 06.telemetry_presence | a telemetry or error-reporting library is referencednote presence only; whether anyone watches it is not visible here · matches 164 |
| 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 210 |
| 06.error_reporting | an error reporter is initialisedinitialised 2 · config files 2 |
| 06.usage_reporting_default | the product's code names no reporting hostsettings on 12 · settings off 3 |
| 06.release_markers | releases are markedtags last year 27 · release commits 0 · changelog commits 21 |
| 06.migrate_on_start | migrations do not run at container start |
| 03.contributor_concentration | no single contributor dominates the last 24 monthsyears 3.4 · window last 24 months · authors 1,514 |
| 03.active_contributors | more than one contributor active in the trailing yearall time 1,514 · active 12mo 623 |
| 03.knowledge_silos | every substantial directory has been touched by more than one personauthors 1,514 · directories 10 |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | an open contributor base, where one-commit contributors are normalauthors 1,514 · one off share 0.578 |
| 03.contributor_attrition | no contributor dominates enough for their absence to matterauthors 1,514 · top share less than a quarter · top contributor last committed within the last three months |
| 03.critical_path_ownership | more than one person changes the critical pathsauthors 1,164 |
| 03.second_contributor_attrition | the second and third contributors are still active |
| 03.bus_factor_trend | the team has not narrowed to one person |
| 03.joiners_and_leavers | the team is not shrinkingleft 108 · joined 148 · regular last year 191 |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of recent change carries evidence of reviewmerges 1 · window last 24 months · with tracked 46 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 41 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 4,682 · source 11,415 · test ratio 0.41 |
| 02.release_cadence | tags are presenttags 179 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry contentsampled 14,418 · 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 41 · with tests 10 |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 0 · test files 4,763 |
| 02.ci_test_gating | no test run in CI is written so that it cannot failconfigs 41 |
| 02.revert_share | change is rarely undoneshare 0.003 · reverts 29 · recent commits 10,242 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 5 · commits since 12 · 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 12 · ci configs 41 · product files 6,917 |
| 01.burst_import | no commit run met both the rate and the net-addition thresholdgap seconds 180 · min add ratio 3.0 · min net added 2,000 |
| 01.initial_dump | first commit is not a disproportionate share of the codebaseinsertions 56,028 · share of insertions 0.0077 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 20.01 · repeat share 0.001 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 8,681 · write once share 0.308 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.0136 · product files 6,732 · distinct blocks 758,673 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 1,835,956 · files 59 · per kloc 0.04 |
| 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 10,193 |
| 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.supply_chain_pinning | third-party build steps are pinned, or fewaction refs 180 · pipe to shell 0 · unpinned third party 2 |
| 05.outbound_timeouts | outbound calls set timeouts, or are fewcalls without timeout 0 |
| 05.migration_reversibility | migrations can be rolled backshare 0.045 · migrations 242 · irreversible 11 |
| 05.shell_from_strings | product code does not build shell commands from stringssites 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.unsafe_html | raw HTML is rare, literal or sanitisedsites 2 |
| 05.signing_material | no signing keystore or profile is committedfiles 0 |
| 05.dataset_provenance | little data is committeddata files 0 · licence or card files 0 |
| 05.license_copyleft_inherited | every licence found in vendored code is permissive or weak-copyleftvendored paths 7 |
| 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.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 13.5 · days since last tag 0 · commits last 90 days 2,455 |
| 03.single_maintainer | no file says one person maintains itstatements 0 |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 17
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.probes_identical | no Kubernetes probes |
| 06.single_replica | no Kubernetes deployments |
| 06.feature_flags | no feature-flag service; flags may live elsewhere |
| 02.long_lived_branches | too few merges to judge (squash and rebase leave none) |
| 01.notebook_outputs | too few notebooks |
| 05.resource_limits | no Kubernetes workload manifests |
| 05.cleartext_traffic | not a mobile app |
| 05.license_manifest_conflict | no packaging manifest states a licence |
| 04.flags_accumulating | the history scanned covers 3 months, less than the 12 this question needs |
| 04.api_versions_coexisting | the history scanned covers 3 months, less than the 18 this question needs |
| 04.deprecations_lingering | the history scanned covers 3 months, less than the 24 this question needs |
| 04.dependency_churn | the history scanned covers 3 months, less than the 24 this question needs |
| 04.ci_platforms_dropped | the history scanned covers 3 months, less than the 24 this question needs |
| 05.project_advisories | record incomplete: no advisory found in the sources that answered; OSV npm dify-client (an empty record for a package published here) did not; NVD: 6 records name dify with nothing tying them to this repository (CVE-2025-0185, CVE-2026-18266, CVE-2026-18632, …) |
| 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 4Y83-EST8-VT9V 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/4Y83EST8VT9V?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: 629.3authenticated: False |
| 82.8s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: full |
| 131.6s | read the git history | commits: 14419tracked files: 14914 |
| 696.7s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 696.8s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
| 1141.2s | kept the facts, never the source, for re-reading under new checks | |
| 1141.2s | deleting the working copy |
Total 1141.2s ·source content sent off this machine: none · calls to a language model: 0 · the clone was deleted when the survey ended
An automated reading of a repository's code and its history up to one commit, with public advisory records. It may be wrong, it is not legal, financial, investment or security advice, and it does not replace diligence by a qualified person. It is provided for information: nobody may rely on it (Borehole's terms, section 3).