Leaderboard github.com

Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick

View repository ↗
Go
★ 3
commit 8f4c6e3ed27d
scored 2026-11-14
scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

22%

explicit

Confidence: 85%
Coverage: 100%

Estimated share of AI-generated code. Explicit attribution is a lower bound.

Code quality

74/100

adequate

Confidence: 90%
Coverage: 100%

Complexity, duplication, lint density, tests, CI, docs and review process.

Security

74/100

adequate

Confidence: 85%
Coverage: 100%

Secrets, static analysis, vulnerable dependencies, CI and supply-chain posture.

Dispute or request a re-score Full report JSON

AI provenance

22% explicit

Explicit AI attribution on 22% of first-party code added; an estimated 22% including velocity signals.

How the score is built

Explicitly attributed share22%
Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts29%
Estimated AI-generated share22%
AI tool configuration files1
Work sessions at AI pace1
Releases at AI pace0
Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.00

Attributed AI tools

Tool	Commits	Lines added	First seen	Last seen
Claude Code	8	830	2026-01-25	2026-02-24

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

2026-012,611 · 29% AI
2026-021,210 · 5% AI

Findings in AI-attributed lines vs the rest

From git blame: 622 lines trace to AI-attributed commits, 2,349 to others. Reported, not scored.

Findings per 1,000 lines	AI-attributed	Other	Ratio
Code quality	0.00	0.00	—
Security	0.00	0.85	0.00×

Evidence by analyzer

Explicit AI attributionok9 items

attributed_commit_share: 12.9%
attributed_commits: 8
attributed_loc: 830
attributed_loc_share: 21.7%
commits: 62
effective_loc: 3,821
tools_detected: 1

AI tool configurationok1 item

CLAUDE.md (claude-code configuration)

artifacts: 1
earliest_adoption: 2026-01-25
tools_configured: 1
workflow_agents: 0

Commit velocityok1 item

1,095 lines of first-party code in ~1.2h (946 lines/hour, 2 commit session)

excluded_import_loc: 0
flagged_loc: 1,095
flagged_loc_share: 28.7%
flagged_units: 1
max_loc_per_hour: 945.78
measured_loc: 3,821
median_loc_per_hour: 112.16
pr_timed_units: 5
pre_ai_era_burst_loc: 0
pre_ai_era_bursts: 0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc: 0
work_units: 15

Release velocityok

flagged_releases: 0
max_loc_per_day: 19,512
releases: 15

Coding styleok

count:assistant_voice: 0
count:emoji_in_code: 0
count:narrated_steps: 0
count:placeholder: 0
files:assistant_voice: 0
files:emoji_in_code: 0
files:narrated_steps: 0
files:placeholder: 0
index: 0
lines_scanned: 2,971
per_kloc:assistant_voice: 0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code: 0
per_kloc:narrated_steps: 0
per_kloc:placeholder: 0

Findings in AI-written linesok

ai_lines: 622
blame_failures: 0
files_blamed: 17
other_lines: 2,349
quality:ai_findings: 0
quality:ai_per_kloc: 0
quality:other_findings: 0
quality:other_per_kloc: 0
security:ai_findings: 0
security:ai_per_kloc: 0
security:other_findings: 2
security:other_per_kloc: 0.85
security:ratio: 0

Code quality

74 adequate

Code quality is adequate: test-to-source ratio 0.13, CI runs tests; 17% of function code in complex or long functions; 6% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.

How the score is built

Complexity60
Duplication70
Lint and smells100
Tests and CI69
Documentation85
Type safetynot measured
Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok2 items

complex_functions: 2
function_nloc: 1,890
functions: 130
long_functions: 1
many_param_functions: 0
mean_ccn: 3.33
p90_ccn: 7
risky_nloc_share: 17.0%

Duplication (jscpd)ok5 items

compared_lines: 2,060
duplicated_lines: 120
duplicated_share: 5.8%
files: 17

Lintok

findings: 0
scanned_lines: 2,971
weighted_findings: 0

Tests and CIok3 items

CI config: .github/workflows/go.yml .github/workflows/go.yml
CI config: .github/workflows/release.yml .github/workflows/release.yml
CI runs tests (go test)

check:ci_present: yes
check:ci_runs_lint: no
check:ci_runs_tests: yes
check:has_tests: yes
check:test_ratio: no
check:tests_cochange: no
ci_files: 2
cochange_commits: 32
cochange_share: 18.8%
source_lines: 2,971
test_lines: 392
test_ratio: 0.13

Documentationok3 items

README.md README.md
LICENSE LICENSE
CHANGELOG.md CHANGELOG.md

check:changelog: yes
check:contributing: no
check:license: yes
check:readme: yes
readme_lines: 88

Type safetyskipped

Security

74 adequate

Security posture is adequate: 1 known vulnerabilities in 1 dependencies; 2 high-severity SAST findings; 7 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

Secrets100
Static analysis (SAST)84
Vulnerable dependencies95
CI workflows26
Security posture20
OpenSSF Scorecardnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

OpenSSF Scorecardskipped

no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo

Package registriesskipped

no registry dependencies declared

Secrets (gitleaks)ok

secrets_current: 0
secrets_history: 0
secrets_low_confidence: 0
secrets_nonprod: 0

Static analysis (opengrep)ok

findings: 2
findings_high: 2
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 0
parse_errors: 0
scanned_lines: 2,971
weighted_findings: 1.50

Dependencies (osv-scanner)ok

penalty: 3
vulnerabilities: 1
vulnerable_packages: 1
vulns_critical: 0
vulns_high: 0
vulns_low: 0
vulns_medium: 0
vulns_unknown: 1

CI workflows (zizmor)ok

findings: 10
findings_high: 7
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 3
penalty: 80.40
workflows: 2

Security postureok

check:dependency_updates: no
check:lockfiles: yes
check:security_policy: no
check:signed_commits: yes
signed_commit_share: 53.2%
unpinned_manifests: 0

Release downloadsok5 items

binary_assets: 80
signals: 1
suspicious: 0

Findings

9 high4 medium

Severity	Rule	Location	Message	Tool
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/go.yml:17	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/go.yml:20	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:23	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/cache-poisoning`	.github/workflows/release.yml:27	runtime artifacts potentially vulnerable to a cache poisoning attack [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:27	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:33	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:42	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`opengrep/go.lang.security.audit.dangerous-exec-command`	internal/cmd/run.go:25	Detected non-static command inside Command. Audit the input to 'exec.Command'. If unverified user data can reach this call site, this is a code injection vulnerability. A malicious actor can inject a malicious script to execute...	Static analysis (opengrep)
high	`opengrep/go.lang.security.audit.dangerous-exec-command`	internal/cmd/run.go:52	Detected non-static command inside Command. Audit the input to 'exec.Command'. If unverified user data can reach this call site, this is a code injection vulnerability. A malicious actor can inject a malicious script to execute...	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`zizmor/excessive-permissions`	.github/workflows/go.yml:14	overly broad permissions [confidence medium]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`	.github/workflows/go.yml:17	credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`	.github/workflows/release.yml:22	credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`osv/GO-2026-5024`	go.mod	golang.org/x/[email protected] (Go) is affected by GO-2026-5024	Dependencies (osv-scanner)

Tools and coverage

Every analyzer that ran on this commit. A failed or skipped tool is a coverage gap: its share of the score is left out and the coverage figure drops.

Analyzer	Pillar	Status	Version	Findings	Note
AI tool configuration	AI provenance	ok	`signatures-v1`	0
Explicit AI attribution	AI provenance	ok	`signatures-v1`	0
Release velocity	AI provenance	ok	`prov-4`	0
Coding style	AI provenance	ok	`—`	0
Commit velocity	AI provenance	ok	`prov-4`	0
Findings in AI-written lines	AI provenance	ok	`git-blame`	0
Complexity (lizard)	Code quality	ok	`lizard 1.25.1`	0
Documentation	Code quality	ok	`—`	0
Duplication (jscpd)	Code quality	ok	`repotrust-dup-w6`	0
Lint	Code quality	ok	`opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414`	0
Tests and CI	Code quality	ok	`—`	0
Type safety	Code quality	skipped	`—`	0
CI workflows (zizmor)	Security	ok	`zizmor 1.32.0`	10
Dependencies (osv-scanner)	Security	ok	`osv-scanner version: 2.7.1`	1
Release downloads	Security	ok	`—`	0
Security posture	Security	ok	`—`	0
Package registries	Security	skipped	`—`	0	no registry dependencies declared
Static analysis (opengrep)	Security	ok	`opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414`	2
OpenSSF Scorecard	Security	skipped	`—`	0	no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo
Secrets (gitleaks)	Security	ok	`gitleaks 8.30.1`	0

Score history

Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.

Scored	Commit	Scoring	AI provenance	Quality	Security
2026-11-14	`8f4c6e3ed27d`	`prov-5+qual-2+sec-2`	22%	74	74
2026-11-14	`8f4c6e3ed27d`	`prov-4+qual-2+sec-2`	22%	74	74

Embed a badge

Maintainers can show these in a README. Badges update when the repository is re-scored.

[![RepoTrust ai](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick/)

[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick/)

[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick/)

Full text report

Repository: https://github.com/Constantine-Kostikas/GitQuick
Commit: 8f4c6e3ed27ded8a3813ec65c204df3a46c64677
Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:00+00:00
Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2

Scores

Pillar	Score	Signal	Confidence	Coverage
AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share)	22	explicit	85%	100%
Code quality	74	adequate	90%	100%
Security	74	adequate	85%	100%

AI provenance

Explicit AI attribution on 22% of first-party code added; an estimated 22% including velocity signals.

Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 21.7%
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 28.7%
Estimated AI-generated share: 21.7%

AI tool	Attributed commits	Lines added
Claude Code	8	830

AI tooling configured in repo: claude-code

Current source lines last changed by AI-attributed commits: 622 of 2,971.

Findings per 1,000 lines	AI-attributed	Other	Ratio
Quality	0.0	0.0	n/a
Security	0.0	0.851	0.0x

Month	Lines added	Attributed to AI
2026-01	2,611	29%
2026-02	1,210	5%

Evidence

Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (582afd43b1b8)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (53d377e41a10)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (7435d5e97d0c)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (a5d290e0f74a)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (037da627f1c7)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (8535e43cd227)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (4d6d28d07e8f)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (6e1df0acc8cd)
CLAUDE.md (claude-code configuration) (CLAUDE.md)
1,095 lines of first-party code in ~1.2h (946 lines/hour, 2 commit session) (62e3a7f24378)

AI provenance describes how code was produced; it is not a quality judgment. Unless attribution is explicit, these are signals consistent with AI generation, not proof. Squash/rebase workflows, imported code, and rewritten history reduce accuracy.

Code quality

Code quality is adequate: test-to-source ratio 0.13, CI runs tests; 17% of function code in complex or long functions; 6% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.

Area	Score
Complexity (lizard)	60
Duplication	70
Code smells (Opengrep)	100
Tests and CI	69
Documentation	85
Type safety	n/a
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance)	n/a

Functions: 130; mean complexity 3.3, 90th percentile 7; 2 complex and 1 long functions
Duplicated lines: 5.8% of 2,060 compared
Tests: 392 test lines for 2,971 source lines (ratio 0.13); CI test commands: go test; 19% of recent source commits also change tests
Docs missing or thin: contributing

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is adequate: 1 known vulnerabilities in 1 dependencies; 2 high-severity SAST findings; 7 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

Area	Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history)	100
Static analysis (Opengrep)	84
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV)	95
CI workflows (zizmor)	26
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles)	20
OpenSSF Scorecard	n/a

Known vulnerabilities: 1 in 1 packages (critical 0, high 0, medium 0, low 0)
Posture checks passed: signed commits, lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates

Top findings

Severity	Finding	Location
high	`opengrep/go.lang.security.audit.dangerous-exec-command`: Detected non-static command inside Command. Audit the input to 'exec.Command'. If unverified user data can reach this call site, this is a code injection vulnerability. A malicious actor can inject a malicious script to execute arbitrary code. [confidence low]	internal/cmd/run.go:25
high	`opengrep/go.lang.security.audit.dangerous-exec-command`: Detected non-static command inside Command. Audit the input to 'exec.Command'. If unverified user data can reach this call site, this is a code injection vulnerability. A malicious actor can inject a malicious script to execute arbitrary code. [confidence low]	internal/cmd/run.go:52
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/go.yml:17
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/go.yml:20
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:23
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:27
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:33
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:42
high	`zizmor/cache-poisoning`: runtime artifacts potentially vulnerable to a cache poisoning attack [confidence low]	.github/workflows/release.yml:27
medium	`osv/GO-2026-5024`: golang.org/x/[email protected] (Go) is affected by GO-2026-5024	go.mod
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	.github/workflows/go.yml:17
medium	`zizmor/excessive-permissions`: overly broad permissions [confidence medium]	.github/workflows/go.yml:14
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	.github/workflows/release.yml:22

Static signals only: the scorer never runs the project's code. Secret findings are pattern matches that were not verified, and secret values are never stored.

Distribution signals

binary-release-asset: release v0.1.17 ships GitQuick_Darwin_arm64.tar.gz (1 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.1.17 ships GitQuick_Darwin_x86_64.tar.gz (0 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.1.17 ships GitQuick_Linux_arm64.tar.gz (0 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.1.17 ships GitQuick_Linux_i386.tar.gz (0 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.1.17 ships GitQuick_Linux_x86_64.tar.gz (1 downloads)

Signals consistent with a repository that exists to distribute a download. They are heuristics, not a verdict; release files were not downloaded or inspected.

Repository profile

Source lines: 2,971; test lines: 392

Language	Lines
Go	3,363