9d38ff5 · 8,202 commits · 6,572 files
Issued 2026-10-04
Apache-2.0 since 2023-06-26: open source; use, change and redistribution need only attribution.
104 checks ran across 6 assessable dimensions. 3 findings are worth checking first. 17 findings, each with evidence. One dimension cannot be assessed without an acquirer.
- 05.60 Apache-2.0 since 2023-06-26: open source; use, change and redistribution need only attribution
- 04.62 Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
- 05.60 Relicensed: Apache-2.0 → MIT (2023-01-31) → MPL-2.0 (2023-06-23) → Apache-2.0 (2023-06-26) LICENSE
- 1 submodule(s) this survey does not read: internal-packages/otlp-importer/protos .gitmodules:1
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.
- 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 | strong | |
| 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 |
- 10% of non-merge commits carry any trailer at all
- low trailer coverage: the convention may not be in consistent use
- no widespread author/committer date divergence
- the declared share is neither decisive nor negligible, so the true figure is more sensitive to undeclared work
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
01 · strong · ratings ↑packages/trigger-sdk/src/v3/ai.ts is 14,012 lines, 170× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 82 lines. 107 files exceed 1,000 lines, the largest being 14,012. 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 87% 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 | packages/trigger-sdk/src/v3/ai.ts:1 — 14,012 lines (170× median) |
| line-count | internal-packages/tsql/src/grammar/TSQLParser.ts:1 — 11,733 lines (143× median) |
| line-count | internal-packages/run-engine/src/run-queue/index.ts:1 — 8,776 lines (107× median) |
| line-count | apps/webapp/app/utils/tablerIcons.ts:1 — 4,823 lines (58× median) |
| line-count | internal-packages/tsql/src/query/printer.ts:1 — 3,640 lines (44× 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 ↑7% of recent commits change more than 2,000 lines
adequate164 of 2434 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 | 164 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 (packages/core/src/v3/apiClient/streamBatchItems.test.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.
| packages/core/src/v3/apiClient/streamBatchItems.test.ts | packages/core/src/v3/apiClient/streamBatchItems.test.ts:512 — 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 · 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 ↑193 direct dependencies in a single manifest
adequate worth checking firstapps/webapp/package.json declares 193 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 apps/webapp/package.json and the 3 other files it cites settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| direct-dependencies | apps/webapp/package.json — 193 declared |
| direct-dependencies | packages/cli-v3/package.json — 55 declared |
| direct-dependencies | packages/core/package.json — 31 declared |
| direct-dependencies | internal-packages/run-engine/package.json — 14 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.
Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
adequateThe newest release, v4.6.4, is not on the branch this survey read; the newest release on it is v4.6.3. 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.
| 51e29f4b1 | tag v4.6.4 |
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 ↑8 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.
| Slack token | 5 cited: Slack token, 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.
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 | base-images/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.
6 SQL statements built from strings
adequate worth checking first6 places in product code build SQL by formatting or joining strings rather than passing parameters, and in 5 of them a value, not a table or column name, goes into the string. Where any of those values comes from a request, it is an injection point. Each site needs a look; the fix, parameters, is small.
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 internal-packages/replication/src/client.ts:737 settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| internal-packages/replication/src/client.ts | internal-packages/replication/src/client.ts:737 — SQL built from a string |
| internal-packages/replication/src/client.ts | internal-packages/replication/src/client.ts:757 — SQL built from a string |
| internal-packages/replication/src/client.ts | internal-packages/replication/src/client.ts:846 — 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.
75 locked dependencies have published vulnerabilities, 32 high or critical in what ships
adequate worth checking first75 of 2,998 locked dependencies match 157 published advisories in OSV, 57 of them rated high or critical. A lockfile says which version is installed, not whether the flawed code is reachable from this product, so each needs a look. Most are fixed by an upgrade, and the advisory names the version.
The check that found this reads significant, but it has not yet held up often enough in Borehole's calibration to rate a finding significant on its own. Opening pnpm-lock.yaml settles it. If it holds when someone checks it, this finding is significant.
| pnpm-lock.yaml | pnpm-lock.yaml — next 16.2.6: GHSA-2xp9-vwfh-vxw4 (critical), fixed in 16.3.3; a development dependency |
| pnpm-lock.yaml | pnpm-lock.yaml — @grpc/grpc-js 1.12.7: GHSA-m9gg-hp2v-232j (high), fixed in 1.13.6 |
| pnpm-lock.yaml | pnpm-lock.yaml — @modelcontextprotocol/sdk 1.25.2: GHSA-345p-7cg4-v4c7 (high), fixed in 1.26.0 |
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.
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.
| apps/webapp/vite.config.ts | apps/webapp/vite.config.ts:82 — 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.
6 environment files are committed
adequate.env.schema, apps/supervisor/.env.schema, apps/webapp/.env.schema and more are 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.
| .env.schema | .env.schema — committed environment file |
| apps/supervisor/.env.schema | apps/supervisor/.env.schema — committed environment file |
| apps/webapp/.env.schema | apps/webapp/.env.schema — 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.
Relicensed: Apache-2.0 → MIT (2023-01-31) → MPL-2.0 (2023-06-23) → Apache-2.0 (2023-06-26)
adequateThe root licence changed 3 time(s). Code taken under earlier terms stays under them; check which terms any fork or customer relied on.
A note that does not affect this rating: a licence change is a fact for the first screen, and only a narrowing of rights within two years of the surveyed commit costs "strong".
| 3bf5464f5 | LICENSE — Apache-2.0 from 2022-11-30 |
| b852731fb | LICENSE — MIT from 2023-01-31 |
| 6a768c3f8 | LICENSE — MPL-2.0 from 2023-06-23 |
| 3bfcde99d | LICENSE — Apache-2.0 from 2023-06-26 |
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.
37 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 23 high or critical
adequateThe newest was published on 2026-10-02. 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 36 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 4.6.3. Answer lives in: the release you run, set against each fixed version.
A note that does not affect this rating: it describes the project's advisory record, and no advisory in it is known to affect the surveyed commit.
| GHSA-qwrm-2cq8-xfr8 | 2026-10-02: GHSA-qwrm-2cq8-xfr8 (high), fixed in >= 4.7.0: Authorize parent runs before attaching batch-created waitpoints |
| GHSA-pc95-gc74-wg87 | 2026-09-16: GHSA-pc95-gc74-wg87 (moderate), fixed in >= 4.6.2: Public session tokens can overwrite own server-authored chat snapshots |
| GHSA-xrp6-5fpv-4fxf | 2026-09-14: GHSA-xrp6-5fpv-4fxf (high), fixed in >= 4.6.0: Missing run authorization allows cross-tenant suspension and resume-data injection |
| GHSA-4gjx-f5hj-678x | 2026-09-14: GHSA-4gjx-f5hj-678x (high), fixed in >= 4.6.0: Restricted additional API keys can read the environment root secret via the env-var dump |
| GHSA-wpp9-mq73-fhqm | 2026-09-14: GHSA-wpp9-mq73-fhqm (low), fixed in >= 4.6.0: Dashboard Agent stores a delegated user token in session input records readable with the chat access token |
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 5,875 files for 10 structured logging libraries; 0 matched |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
Readiness and liveness probes are identical in 5 of 6 workloads
adequateBoth probes call the same endpoint. When a dependency slows down, the liveness probe fails with the readiness probe, so the platform restarts pods that only needed taking out of rotation, and a partial outage becomes a full one. Liveness should ask whether the process is alive; readiness whether it can serve.
| hosting/k8s/helm/templates/clickhouse.yaml | hosting/k8s/helm/templates/clickhouse.yaml — same probe endpoint twice |
| hosting/k8s/helm/templates/electric.yaml | hosting/k8s/helm/templates/electric.yaml — same probe endpoint twice |
| hosting/k8s/helm/templates/registry.yaml | hosting/k8s/helm/templates/registry.yaml — same probe endpoint twice |
Respond to this finding
Your response is published beside the finding, not instead of it. A finding you can argue with is the point — and a wrong one is calibration data we want.
An owner's response is removed only when it is unlawful, impersonates someone, publishes personal data or a credential, or is not about the finding. Disagreeing with the report is never a reason. To report a response, or to reach us about one, write to takedown@borehole.dev.
5 of 6 deployments run a single replica
adequate5 deployments set `replicas: 1`, and nothing (an autoscaler, a disruption budget) adds more. Every deploy and every node drain is downtime, and the availability the buyer inherits has a ceiling.
A note that does not affect this rating: in Borehole's calibration, this check's notes were usually true but overstated.
| hosting/k8s/helm/templates/clickhouse.yaml | hosting/k8s/helm/templates/clickhouse.yaml — replicas: 1 |
| hosting/k8s/helm/templates/electric.yaml | hosting/k8s/helm/templates/electric.yaml — replicas: 1 |
| hosting/k8s/helm/templates/registry.yaml | hosting/k8s/helm/templates/registry.yaml — replicas: 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.
The code branches on the environment's name at 17 places
adequate17 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.
| apps/webapp/app/components/StaleAssetRecovery.tsx | apps/webapp/app/components/StaleAssetRecovery.tsx:126 — branch on the environment name |
| apps/webapp/app/components/StaleAssetRecovery.tsx | apps/webapp/app/components/StaleAssetRecovery.tsx:126 — branch on the environment name |
| apps/webapp/app/components/StaleAssetRecovery.tsx | apps/webapp/app/components/StaleAssetRecovery.tsx:127 — 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
8 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 4,388 product files. Where does the design live, and who holds it?
- measured The repository pulls code in through git submodules (.gitmodules). A buyer receives pointers, not that code. Can every submodule be fetched without the team's credentials, and who owns each one?
- 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 141 people have committed here. Which of them are you acquiring, and which are you replacing?
- Who mentors whom, and would that survive a departure?
- Can the team grow, and who stands behind the top three contributors?
- Is the seniority mix sound, and will pay survive your salary bands?
- Is the pace sustainable? Commit times cannot say: git keeps no reliable local time.
- Does the team want to stay after close?
- How are decisions made and disagreements resolved?
Product & Engineering Maturity
04 · minimal coverage- Can this team deliver the stated roadmap on the stated timeline?
- Does leadership know about the debt, and is time budgeted to repay it?
- Is the engineering shape consistent with the commercial story?
Security & Reliability Posture
05 · partial coverage- measured No threat model is in the tree of what looks like a running service. Does one exist elsewhere, and who owns it?
- What has actually broken, how often, and how badly?
- What did external testing find, and was it fixed?
- What is the SOC 2, ISO 27001 or GDPR status, and where is the evidence?
Observability & Operations
06 · partial coverage- measured 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 apps/, internal-packages/, packages/. Which of your existing systems would each of those have to absorb or replace?
- The repository carries deployment configuration (base-images/Dockerfile and 32 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/triggerdotdev/trigger.dev/9d38ff5)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 — 73
| Signal | What it found |
|---|---|
| 04.hotspot_concentration | change is spread across the codebase rather than pooling in a few filesfiles 14,485 · top5 share 0.022 |
| 04.debt_markers | debt markers are sparsemarkers 55 · per kloc 0.05 · lines read 1,134,550 |
| 04.test_growth | test effort kept pace with code writtenlate test per code 0.557 · early test per code 0.016 |
| 04.churn_trend | rework is not rising against new worklate delete per insert 0.408 · early delete per insert 0.362 |
| 04.eol_runtime | every pinned runtime is still supportedeol as of 2026-09-24 |
| 04.fixes_with_tests | fixes usually come with a testfixes 854 · share 0.328 · with tests 280 |
| 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 33 |
| 04.compat_layers | little code is kept for the old wayshare 0.0 · code files 3,925 · compat files 1 |
| 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 306 |
| 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 122 |
| 06.error_reporting | an error reporter is initialisedinitialised 1 · config files 0 |
| 06.usage_reporting_default | the product's code names no reporting hostsettings on 7 · settings off 4 |
| 06.deployed_image_floats | every deployed image names a versionimages 1 · floating 0 |
| 06.release_markers | releases are markedtags last year 349 · release commits 1 · changelog commits 47 |
| 06.migrate_on_start | migrations run at start, but as a single instance, where that is safesites 1 · scaled False |
| 03.contributor_concentration | no single contributor dominates the last 24 monthsyears 3.8 · window last 24 months · authors 141 |
| 03.active_contributors | more than one contributor active in the trailing yearall time 141 · active 12mo 31 |
| 03.knowledge_silos | every substantial directory has been touched by more than one personauthors 141 · directories 5 |
| 03.drive_by_contributors | an open contributor base, where one-commit contributors are normalauthors 141 · one off share 0.596 |
| 03.contributor_attrition | the dominant contributor is still activeauthors 141 · top share a quarter or more · top contributor last committed within the last three months |
| 03.critical_path_ownership | more than one person changes the critical pathsauthors 61 |
| 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 3 · joined 9 · regular last year 14 |
| 02.merge_discipline | a meaningful share of recent change carries evidence of reviewmerges 20 · window last 24 months · with tracked 37 |
| 02.ci_presence | CI configuration is present in the working treecount 38 |
| 02.test_presence | tests are present in a normal proportion to sourcetests 1,424 · source 5,297 · test ratio 0.269 |
| 02.release_cadence | tags are presenttags 4,218 |
| 02.conventional_commits | commit subjects generally carry contentsampled 8,008 · low content share 0.008 |
| 02.branch_protection_hints | process scaffolding is present in the repository |
| 02.ci_runs_tests | CI invokes a test runnerconfigs 38 · with tests 8 |
| 02.skipped_tests | few tests are switched offfocused 0 · skipped 6 · test files 1,495 |
| 02.ci_test_gating | no test run in CI is written so that it cannot failconfigs 38 |
| 02.revert_share | change is rarely undoneshare 0.001 · reverts 3 · recent commits 2,642 |
| 02.dependency_update_cadence | dependencies move with the codelockfiles 15 · commits since 0 · days since lockfile changed 0 |
| 02.lint_in_build | a linter or formatter runs in the buildwired 39 · ci configs 38 · product files 3,925 |
| 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 e21ae74..251b64c · bursts explained 1 · largest net added 2,194 |
| 01.initial_dump | first commit is not a disproportionate share of the codebaseinsertions 202 · share of insertions 0.0001 |
| 01.message_uniformity | commit subjects vary in wording and lengthlength stdev 22.22 · repeat share 0.039 |
| 01.revision_depth | most files were revisited after they were first writtenfiles seen 3,730 · write once share 0.384 |
| 01.duplicated_blocks | little shipping code is repeated verbatim across filesshare 0.0135 · product files 3,874 · distinct blocks 434,998 |
| 01.swallowed_errors | errors are rarely thrown awayloc 1,140,244 · files 17 · per kloc 0.02 |
| 01.build_reproducibility | every base image names a versionfloating 0 · from lines 13 |
| 01.unfinished_migration | no language migration is stalled halfway |
| 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.supply_chain_pinning | third-party build steps are pinned, or fewaction refs 154 · pipe to shell 0 · unpinned third party 0 |
| 05.shell_from_strings | product code does not build shell commands from stringssites 0 |
| 05.unsafe_deserialization | no code-executing deserialiser in product codesites 0 |
| 05.tls_verification_off | no TLS verification is switched off in product codefiles 0 · sites 0 · pinned instead 0 |
| 05.resource_limits | every workload declares limitsworkloads 6 · without limits 0 |
| 05.privileged_workloads | no workload runs privileged or in the host's namespacessites 0 · behind a setting or built here 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 3 |
| 05.signing_material | no signing keystore or profile is committedfiles 0 |
| 05.license_vendored_unlicensed | no vendored third-party code is committedcomponents 0 |
| 05.license_grant_unclear | the licence is recognisable as Apache-2.0class permissive · license Apache-2.0 |
| 05.committed_native_libraries | no widely used compiled library is committed to the productlibraries 0 |
| 04.deprecations_lingering | few deprecations have outlived two yearsolder than two years 2 · files with deprecations 64 |
| 04.dependency_churn | few dependencies were added and dropped within 60 daysdependencies seen 350 · added in two years 211 · removed within 60 days 3 |
| 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 0.0 · days since last tag -3 · commits last 90 days 721 |
| 03.single_maintainer | no file says one person maintains itstatements 0 |
| 05.project_exploited | no affecting advisory is on CISA's Known Exploited listexploited 0 |
Could not conclude, or did not apply — 14
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.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 TypeScript, the language the product is written in: this check's patterns read other languages only |
| 05.migration_reversibility | too few migrations to judge |
| 05.cleartext_traffic | not a mobile app |
| 05.dataset_provenance | not a data or machine-learning repository |
| 05.license_copyleft_inherited | no third-party code is committed to this repository, so the licences it depends on are resolved at build time and are not readable here |
| 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_advisories | could not tell whether 36 published advisories affect the surveyed code: its version is only known to be at least 4.6.3 |
Anyone can check this report against the authoritative record — click the stamp, or enter VNS2-MAAM-48TM 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/VNS2MAAM48TM?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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-04 · shown | borehole 0.7.13 | 19 | adequate |
5 earlier (show)
| 2026-10-03 | borehole 0.7.12 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-10-03 | borehole 0.7.11 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-10-02 | borehole 0.7.10 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-10-01 | borehole 0.7.9 | 19 | adequate |
| 2026-09-30 | borehole 0.7.8 | 19 | 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 — 3 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 | re-read from the facts kept at the last survey; nothing was cloned | facts version: 1d7c04ef8dca7905 |
| 58.1s | ran the deterministic checks | blame pass: Falseread working tree: False |
| 58.1s | recorded where this scan ran | attested: Falseenvironment: cloud-run |
Total 58.1s ·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).