3c78a38 · 8,009 commits · 7,713 files
Issued 2026-10-23
Nothing significant. Questions worth asking about Security & Reliability Posture, Product & Engineering Maturity.
103 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 2 findings are worth checking first. 16 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 04.61 No release for 37 months while development continues
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.
- 2 findings from checks Borehole's calibration found wrong more often than right are no longer published.
- 1 finding about one contributor is withheld: one author wrote nearly all of this repository's commits; a buyer of this report reads them.
- The file and line of 1 credential-shaped match is 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 | strong | |
| 02 | Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | adequate | |
| 03 | Organization & Key-Person Risk | not assessable | |
| 04 | Product & Engineering Maturity | adequate | |
| 05 | Security & Reliability Posture | adequate | |
| 06 | Observability & Operations | strong | |
| 07 | Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable |
- 93% of non-merge commits carry any trailer at all
- no widespread author/committer date divergence
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
01 · strong · ratings ↑plasmicpkgs/commerce-providers/saleor/src/schema.d.ts is 11,489 lines, 220× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 52 lines. 99 files exceed 1,000 lines, the largest being 11,489. 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 92% 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 | plasmicpkgs/commerce-providers/saleor/src/schema.d.ts:1 — 11,489 lines (220× median) |
| line-count | platform/wab/src/wab/server/db/DbMgr.ts:1 — 11,018 lines (211× median) |
| line-count | platform/wab/src/wab/client/studio-ctx/StudioCtx.tsx:1 — 8,010 lines (154× median) |
| line-count | platform/wab/src/wab/shared/code-components/code-components.ts:1 — 5,344 lines (102× median) |
| line-count | platform/wab/src/wab/component-metas/react-meta-gen-compressed.ts:1 — 5,104 lines (98× 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
adequate126 of 2179 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 | 126 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.
Tests are retried until they pass
adequateThe suite is configured to retry failing tests (platform/loader-tests/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.
| platform/loader-tests/playwright.config.ts | platform/loader-tests/playwright.config.ts:26 — 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: one author wrote nearly all of this repository's commits, so a finding about one contributor would be about someone its history all but names; the public report does not carry those, and does not rate this dimension without them. The findings below are what it could still read.
Regular contributors fell from 15 to 9 in a year
adequate4 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 | 15 then 9; 4 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 ↑242 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequate worth checking firstplatform/wab/package.json declares 242 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 platform/wab/package.json and the 3 other files it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| direct-dependencies | platform/wab/package.json — 242 declared |
| direct-dependencies | platform/canvas-packages/package.json — 103 declared |
| direct-dependencies | platform/loader-bundle-env/package.json — 95 declared |
| direct-dependencies | packages/react-web/package.json — 29 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: HTTP clients: axios, node-fetch; dates: date-fns, dayjs, moment. 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/cli/package.json | packages/cli/package.json — several libraries per job |
| packages/create-plasmic-app/package.json | packages/create-plasmic-app/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.
No release for 37 months while development continues
adequateThe last tag, create-plasmic-app@0.0.80, was cut 1118 days before the survey; the typical gap between releases was 0 days, and 411 commits landed in the last 90 days. Users run the last release, not this code.
| 7d616f63f | last tag create-plasmic-app@0.0.80 |
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 files still carry code deprecated more than two years ago
adequate13 files were marked deprecated over two years ago and still are, the oldest since Feb 2022. 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.
| plasmicpkgs/plasmic-basic-components/src/Data.tsx | plasmicpkgs/plasmic-basic-components/src/Data.tsx — deprecated since Feb 2022 |
| plasmicpkgs/commerce-providers/swell/src/schema.d.ts | plasmicpkgs/commerce-providers/swell/src/schema.d.ts — deprecated since Mar 2022 |
| plasmicpkgs/commerce-providers/saleor/src/schema.d.ts | plasmicpkgs/commerce-providers/saleor/src/schema.d.ts — deprecated since Jun 2022 |
| plasmicpkgs/react-scroll-parallax/src/ParallaxProvider.tsx | plasmicpkgs/react-scroll-parallax/src/ParallaxProvider.tsx — deprecated since Jul 2022 |
| packages/loader-fetcher/src/fetcher.ts | packages/loader-fetcher/src/fetcher.ts — deprecated since Jun 2023 |
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 credential-shaped string committed to the tree
adequateMatches for JWT appear in tracked files outside test and fixture paths. They stay in the history even after they leave the tree, so what matters is whether each was rotated. The code cannot tell whether any of them is live, and that decides whether this matters: none sits in production configuration, and none is in a format its provider keeps for live keys. Is any of these live? Show that each was rotated after it was committed, and when.
| JWT | JWT pattern matched |
| 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.
None of the standard security guard rails are configured
adequateThere is no disclosure policy, no automated dependency updates, no named code owners and no pre-commit configuration. None of these is load-bearing on its own. Their collective absence says that security posture here is whatever the current team happens to remember to do, which is not a posture that survives the team changing.
| guardrail-scan | checked 5 kinds of guard rail across 7,713 tracked files; 0 present |
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.
107 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 38 high or critical in what ships
adequate worth checking first107 of 5,472 locked dependencies match 218 published advisories in OSV, 116 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 platform/pnpm-lock.yaml and the 1 other file it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| platform/pnpm-lock.yaml | platform/pnpm-lock.yaml — next 12.3.7: GHSA-2464-fhr4-w9xw (critical), fixed in 15.5.28 |
| pnpm-lock.yaml | pnpm-lock.yaml — next 15.5.24: GHSA-2464-fhr4-w9xw (critical), fixed in 15.5.28 |
| pnpm-lock.yaml | pnpm-lock.yaml — next 13.5.11: GHSA-2464-fhr4-w9xw (critical), fixed in 15.5.28; a development dependency |
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.
| packages/host/rollup.config.mjs | packages/host/rollup.config.mjs:26 — source maps in a production build |
| packages/react-web/rollup.config.mjs | packages/react-web/rollup.config.mjs:27 — source maps in a production build |
| plasmicpkgs/antd/rollup.config.mjs | plasmicpkgs/antd/rollup.config.mjs:24 — 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.
7 SQL statements built from strings
adequate7 places in product code build SQL by formatting or joining strings rather than passing parameters. 4 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.
| platform/wab/src/wab/server/data-sources/postgres-fetcher.ts | platform/wab/src/wab/server/data-sources/postgres-fetcher.ts:165 — SQL built from a string |
| platform/wab/src/wab/server/db/DbCon.ts | platform/wab/src/wab/server/db/DbCon.ts:229 — SQL built from a string |
| platform/wab/src/wab/server/db/DbCon.ts | platform/wab/src/wab/server/db/DbCon.ts:239 — 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.
5 shell commands built from strings
adequate5 places run a command through a shell (`shell=True`, `os.system`, `exec` with a template) rather than passing arguments. Where any part comes from outside, it is command injection. 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.
| packages/cli/src/utils/npm-utils.ts | packages/cli/src/utils/npm-utils.ts:51 — command run through a shell |
| packages/cli/src/utils/npm-utils.ts | packages/cli/src/utils/npm-utils.ts:55 — command run through a shell |
| packages/cli/src/utils/npm-utils.ts | packages/cli/src/utils/npm-utils.ts:69 — command run through 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.
27 places insert HTML from a variable without sanitising it
adequate27 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.
| packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-js/gatsby-ssr.jsx | packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-js/gatsby-ssr.jsx:13 — HTML from a variable |
| packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-ts/gatsby-ssr.tsx | packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-ts/gatsby-ssr.tsx:13 — HTML from a variable |
| packages/create-plasmic-app/src/gatsby/template.ts | packages/create-plasmic-app/src/gatsby/template.ts:273 — 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.
Observability & Operations
06 · strong · ratings ↑The code branches on the environment's name at 24 places
adequate24 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.
| packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-js/gatsby-ssr.jsx | packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-js/gatsby-ssr.jsx:33 — branch on the environment name |
| packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-js/gatsby-ssr.jsx | packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-js/gatsby-ssr.jsx:41 — branch on the environment name |
| packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-ts/gatsby-ssr.tsx | packages/create-plasmic-app/cpa-out/gatsby-loader-ts/gatsby-ssr.tsx:33 — 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
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 5,922 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: one author wrote nearly all of this repository's commits, so a finding about one contributor would be about someone its history all but names; the public report does not carry those, and does not rate this dimension without them.
- Which of the people who wrote this are part of the transaction, and for how long after it?
- 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 05.1 and 05.5 found credential-shaped strings in this repository. Was each one revoked at the provider? Deleting it from the code revokes nothing; only the provider's audit log shows that it was.
- measured No threat model is in the tree of what looks like a running service. Does one exist elsewhere, and who owns it?
- What has actually broken, how often, and how badly?
- What did external testing find, and was it fixed?
- What is the SOC 2, ISO 27001 or GDPR status, and where is the evidence?
Observability & Operations
06 · partial coverage- measured Nothing in the tree backs up or restores data. How is data backed up, and has a restore ever been rehearsed?
- measured No alert rule is defined in the repository. Where are alerts defined, who receives them, and when did one last fire?
- Are the dashboards opened, the alerts acknowledged and the pages answered?
- Are the service-level objectives actually met?
- Who carries the pager, and how often does it go off?
- What does it cost to run, and how much headroom is there?
Fit with the Acquirer
07 · none coverageNot rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.
- This is primarily a TypeScript codebase. Does your engineering organisation already run TypeScript in production, or would this be the first?
- The bulk of this system sits in platform/, plasmicpkgs/, packages/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- The repository carries deployment configuration (docker-compose.yml and 2 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/plasmicapp/plasmic/3c78a38)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 — 87 signals that ran and did not fire
Appendix: rejection log — 87 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 — 68
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few filesfiles 13,207 · top5 share 0.038 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 292 · per kloc 0.21 · lines read 1,373,373 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 0.124 · early test per code 0.087 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.324 · early delete per insert 0.316 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 718 · share 0.26 · with tests 187 |
| 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 4,449 · 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 97 |
| 06.structured_logging | a structured logging library is referencedmatches 4 |
| 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 10 |
| 06.error_reporting | an error reporter is initialisedinitialised 5 · config files 0 |
| 06.usage_reporting_default | the product's code names no reporting hostsettings on 0 · settings off 1 |
| 06.release_markers | releases are markedtags last year 0 · release commits 0 · changelog commits 4 |
| 06.migrate_on_start | migrations do not run at container start |
| 03.active_contributors | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
| 03.knowledge_silos | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
| 03.contributor_attrition | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
| 03.critical_path_ownership | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
| 03.second_contributor_attrition | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
| 03.bus_factor_trend | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of recent change carries evidence of reviewmerges 0 · window last 24 months · with tracked 0 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 1 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 659 · source 5,103 · test ratio 0.129 |
| 02.release_cadence | tags are presenttags 6,006 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry contentsampled 7,135 · low content share 0.162 |
| 02.branch_protection_hints | process scaffolding is present in the repository |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 17 · test files 940 |
| 02.ci_test_gating | no test run in CI is written so that it cannot failconfigs 1 |
| 02.revert_share | change is rarely undoneshare 0.005 · reverts 14 · recent commits 2,724 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 59 · commits since 0 · days since lockfile changed 0 |
| 02.lint_in_build | a linter or formatter runs in the buildwired 73 · ci configs 1 · product files 4,449 |
| 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 313 · share of insertions 0.0 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 24.27 · repeat share 0.248 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 5,742 · write once share 0.332 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.018 · product files 4,443 · distinct blocks 475,367 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 1,379,564 · files 40 · per kloc 0.03 |
| 01.build_reproducibility | every base image names a versionfloating 0 · from lines 3 |
| 01.unfinished_migration | no language migration is stalled halfway |
| 01.weights_in_git | no model weights are committedfiles 0 |
| 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 2 |
| 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 1 · pipe to shell 0 · unpinned third party 0 |
| 05.migration_reversibility | migrations can be rolled backshare 0.0 · migrations 37 · irreversible 0 |
| 05.unsafe_deserialization | no code-executing deserialiser in product codesites 0 |
| 05.tls_verification_off | no TLS verification is switched off in product codefiles 0 · sites 0 · pinned instead 0 |
| 05.privileged_workloads | no workload runs privileged or in the host's namespacessites 0 · behind a setting or built here 0 |
| 05.credentials_in_deploy_config | deployment configuration references secrets, never holds themfiles 0 · sites 0 |
| 05.public_env_secret | only publishable values carry a public prefixnames 0 · sites 0 · not secrets 0 |
| 05.signing_material | no signing keystore or profile is committedfiles 0 |
| 05.license_copyleft_inherited | every licence found in vendored code is permissive or weak-copyleftvendored paths 1 |
| 05.license_vendored_unlicensed | no vendored third-party code is committedcomponents 0 |
| 05.license_grant_unclear | the licence is recognisable as MITclass permissive · license MIT |
| 05.committed_native_libraries | no widely used compiled library is committed to the productlibraries 0 |
| 04.api_versions_coexisting | one API version is served, or none |
| 04.dependency_churn | few dependencies were added and dropped within 60 daysdependencies seen 275 · added in two years 50 · removed within 60 days 1 |
| 04.ci_platforms_dropped | no platform was dropped from CI in the last two years |
| 04.repository_status | the README's first screen states no end, move or freezestatements 0 |
| 02.development_elsewhere | nothing says development happens elsewhereno pr statements 0 · mirror statements 0 · replayed commit share 0.0 |
| 05.licence_changes | the root licence has not changed in the history readlicence versions 1 · unreleased changes 0 |
| 05.paid_edition | no directory carries a separate paid-edition licencedirectories 0 |
| 03.single_maintainer | withheld: this check's result would describe one person |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 19
Not a clean result. Each says why it could not answer here.
| Signal | Why |
|---|---|
| 04.schema_churn | columns, once added, stay |
| 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 |
| 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 | not a data or machine-learning repository |
| 05.outbound_timeouts | not assessed for TSX or TypeScript, the languages the product is written in: this check's patterns read other languages only |
| 05.resource_limits | no Kubernetes workload manifests |
| 05.cleartext_traffic | not a mobile app |
| 05.dataset_provenance | not a data or machine-learning repository |
| 05.license_manifest_conflict | no packaging manifest states a licence |
| 04.flags_accumulating | few or no feature flags in the history |
| 04.release_branch | too few release tags to tell |
| 05.project_advisories | record incomplete: no advisory found in the sources that answered; OSV npm @plasmicapp/auth-api (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/auth-react (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/cli (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm create-plasmic-app (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/data-sources-context (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/data-sources (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/host (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-core (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-edge (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-fetcher (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-gatsby (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-nextjs (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-react (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-splits (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/nextjs-app-router (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/prepass (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/query (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/react-web-runtime (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/react-web (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/watcher (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicpkgs/airtable (an empty record for a package published here) did not |
| 05.advisory_record | record incomplete: no advisory against the project in the last 24 months; OSV npm @plasmicapp/auth-api (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/auth-react (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/cli (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm create-plasmic-app (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/data-sources-context (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/data-sources (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/host (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-core (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-edge (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-fetcher (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-gatsby (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-nextjs (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-react (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/loader-splits (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/nextjs-app-router (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/prepass (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/query (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/react-web-runtime (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/react-web (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicapp/watcher (an empty record for a package published here), OSV npm @plasmicpkgs/airtable (an empty record for a package published here) did not answer |
| 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 SR02-WB7D-9VMP 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/SR02WB7D9VMP?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: 325.9authenticated: False |
| 32.5s | cloned the repository to a temporary directory | depth: full |
| 84.6s | read the git history | commits: 8009tracked files: 7713 |
| 445.9s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 446.0s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
| 702.6s | kept the facts, never the source, for re-reading under new checks | |
| 702.6s | deleting the working copy |
Total 702.6s ·source content sent off this machine: none · calls to a language model: 0 · the clone was deleted when the survey ended
An automated reading of a repository's code and its history up to one commit, with public advisory records. It may be wrong, it is not legal, financial, investment or security advice, and it does not replace diligence by a qualified person. It is provided for information: nobody may rely on it (Borehole's terms, section 3).