Borehole reading · not a certification
Check a mark
A Borehole code resolves to the analysis we actually ran. Type the code printed on a report and this page re-renders the authoritative version — not a claim about it.
Twelve characters. Case and dashes do not matter.
Verified
This code matches a Borehole analysis of pycqa/bandit, and the record is unchanged since the mark was issued.
- Repository
- pycqa/bandit
- Commit
- 48ef27bd1bbc32f4e585c92310f7a574e87f6b04
- Surveyed
- 2026-11-03
- Mark issued
- 2026-11-03
- Assessor
- borehole 0.7.15
- Checks run
- 106
- Ran in
- cloud-run — not attested
Its report page publishes this analysis under today's rules. The mark above still attests to the record as issued. The page differs from it as follows, and its headline band reads adequate.
- 1 finding from checks Borehole's calibration found wrong more often than right is no longer published.
What the analysis recorded
| Dimension | Band | Findings |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance | strong | 0 |
| Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | strong | 0 |
| Organization & Key-Person Risk | adequate | 2 |
| Product & Engineering Maturity | strong | 0 |
| Security & Reliability Posture | adequate | 5 |
| Observability & Operations | not assessable | 0 |
| Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable | 0 |