Leaderboard github.com
MaykEu/DeepVault
An interactive learning platform for mastering computers, programming, and software engineering. Pure HTML/CSS/JS — zero dependencies, zero server. Built with AI.
AI provenance
0%
possible
- Confidence
- 65%
- Coverage
- 100%
Estimated share of AI-generated code. Explicit attribution is a lower bound.
Code quality
40/100
poor
- Confidence
- 90%
- Coverage
- 100%
Complexity, duplication, lint density, tests, CI, docs and review process.
Security
59/100
weak
- Confidence
- 85%
- Coverage
- 100%
Secrets, static analysis, vulnerable dependencies, CI and supply-chain posture.
AI provenance
0% possible
Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development. Comments and strings use phrasing typical of LLM-written code (see the coding style evidence).
How the score is built
- Explicitly attributed share0%
- Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts72%
- Estimated AI-generated share0%
- AI tool configuration files0
- Work sessions at AI pace2
- Releases at AI pacenot measured
- Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)3.49
Lines added per month all AI-attributed share
- 2026-0746,259 · 0% AI
Evidence by analyzer
Explicit AI attributionok
- attributed_commit_share
- 0.0%
- attributed_commits
- 0
- attributed_loc
- 0
- attributed_loc_share
- 0.0%
- commits
- 330
- effective_loc
- 46,259
- tools_detected
- 0
AI tool configurationok
- artifacts
- 0
- tools_configured
- 0
- workflow_agents
- 0
Commit velocityok2 items
- 26,982 lines of first-party code in ~7.2h (3,745 lines/hour, 22 commit session)
- 6,435 lines of first-party code in ~5.8h (1,112 lines/hour, 42 commit session)
- excluded_import_loc
- 2,156
- flagged_loc
- 33,417
- flagged_loc_share
- 75.8%
- flagged_units
- 2
- max_loc_per_hour
- 3,745.48
- measured_loc
- 44,103
- median_loc_per_hour
- 152.75
- pr_timed_units
- 0
- pre_ai_era_burst_loc
- 0
- pre_ai_era_bursts
- 0
- pre_ai_era_measured_loc
- 0
- work_units
- 23
Release velocityskipped
Coding styleok
- count:assistant_voice
- 0
- count:emoji_in_code
- 34
- count:narrated_steps
- 0
- count:placeholder
- 0
- files:assistant_voice
- 0
- files:emoji_in_code
- 6
- files:narrated_steps
- 0
- files:placeholder
- 0
- index
- 3.49
- lines_scanned
- 4,875
- per_kloc:assistant_voice
- 0
- per_kloc:emoji_in_code
- 6.97
- per_kloc:narrated_steps
- 0
- per_kloc:placeholder
- 0
Code quality
40 poor
Code quality is poor: test-to-source ratio 0.01, no CI test run detected; 40% of function code in complex or long functions; 53% duplicated lines. Weakest area: duplication.
How the score is built
- Complexity30
- Duplication4
- Lint and smells95
- Tests and CI21
- Documentation80
- Type safety40
- Review processnot measured
Evidence by analyzer
Complexity (lizard)ok10 items
- render in js/topic-hub.js: complexity 77, 216 lines
- main in convert.py: complexity 71, 187 lines
- hicpp in js/learn-legacy.js: complexity 52, 1 lines
- tokenize in js/code-highlight.js: complexity 43, 87 lines
- showQuestion in js/quiz-engine.js: complexity 39, 86 lines
- _renderQuestion in js/exercises-dashboard.js: complexity 36, 105 lines
- noteCard in js/topic-hub.js: complexity 30, 54 lines
- route in js/router.js: complexity 28, 32 lines
- render in js/dashboard.js: complexity 23, 82 lines
- window.render3DGraph in js/exercises-3d.js: complexity 23, 115 lines
- complex_functions
- 25
- function_nloc
- 3,554
- functions
- 318
- long_functions
- 4
- many_param_functions
- 1
- mean_ccn
- 4.89
- p90_ccn
- 10
- risky_nloc_share
- 40.4%
Duplication (jscpd)ok3 items
- 6+ duplicated lines: data/exercises-data.js:15 and data/exercises-data.js:60
- 6+ duplicated lines: js/exercises-dashboard.js:224 and js/exercises-dashboard.js:671
- 6+ duplicated lines: js/learn-legacy.js:1 and js/learn.js:1
- compared_lines
- 19,165
- duplicated_lines
- 10,237
- duplicated_share
- 53.4%
- files
- 27
Lintok
- category:best-practice
- 4
- category:correctness
- 1
- findings
- 5
- scanned_lines
- 25,282
- weighted_findings
- 5
Tests and CIok
- check:ci_present
- no
- check:ci_runs_lint
- no
- check:ci_runs_tests
- no
- check:has_tests
- yes
- check:test_ratio
- no
- check:tests_cochange
- no
- ci_files
- 0
- cochange_commits
- 251
- cochange_share
- 0.8%
- source_lines
- 25,282
- test_lines
- 306
- test_ratio
- 0.01
Documentationok3 items
- README.md
README.md - LICENSE.md
LICENSE.md - CONTRIBUTING.md
CONTRIBUTING.md
- check:changelog
- no
- check:contributing
- yes
- check:license
- yes
- check:readme
- yes
- readme_lines
- 105
Type safetyok
- check:low_escape_density
- yes
- check:strict_config
- no
- escapes
- 0
- escapes_per_kloc
- 0
Security
59 weak
Security posture is weak: 61 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.
How the score is built
- Secrets90
- Static analysis (SAST)50
- Vulnerable dependenciesnot measured
- CI workflowsnot measured
- Security posture0
- 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
- 3
- secrets_nonprod
- 0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
- findings
- 78
- findings_high
- 61
- findings_low
- 0
- findings_medium
- 17
- parse_errors
- 0
- scanned_lines
- 25,282
- weighted_findings
- 50
Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped
CI workflows (zizmor)skipped
Security postureok
- check:dependency_updates
- no
- check:lockfiles
- yes
- check:security_policy
- no
- check:signed_commits
- no
- signed_commit_share
- 0.0%
- unpinned_manifests
- 0
Release downloadsok
- binary_assets
- 0
- signals
- 0
- suspicious
- 0
Findings
61 high22 medium3 low
86 findings
| Severity | Rule | Location | Message | Tool |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit |
convert.py:288 | Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/dashboard.js:93 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/dashboard.js:93 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/exercises-3d.js:334 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/exercises-3d.js:334 | User controlled data in a `listDiv.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:134 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:134 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:204 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:204 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:250 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:250 | User controlled data in a `graphDiv.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:309 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:309 | User controlled data in a `hintsDiv.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:332 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:332 | User controlled data in a `feedbackDiv.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:413 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:413 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/history.js:57 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/history.js:57 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn-legacy.js:1 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn-legacy.js:1 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn.js:1 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn.js:1 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/learn.js:3 | User controlled data in a `c.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/quiz-engine.js:19 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/quiz-engine.js:19 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/quiz-engine.js:192 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/quiz-engine.js:192 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/quiz-engine.js:26 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/quiz-engine.js:26 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/quiz-engine.js:318 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/quiz-engine.js:318 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/search.js:69 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/search.js:69 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/summary.js:28 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/summary.js:28 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/theme.js:15 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/theme.js:15 | User controlled data in a `btn.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/theme.js:34 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/theme.js:34 | User controlled data in a `dd.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method |
js/topic-hub.js:258 | User controlled data in methods like `innerHTML`, `outerHTML` or `document.write` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml |
js/topic-hub.js:258 | User controlled data in a `container.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.best-practice.javascript-alert |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:141 | found alert() call; should this be in production code? | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.best-practice.javascript-alert |
js/storage.js:134 | found alert() call; should this be in production code? | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.best-practice.javascript-alert |
js/storage.js:151 | found alert() call; should this be in production code? | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.best-practice.javascript-alert |
js/storage.js:154 | found alert() call; should this be in production code? | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.correctness.no-stringify-keys |
js/storage.js:200 | JSON stringify does not produce a stable key ordering, and should not be relied on for producing object keys. Consider using json-stable-stringify instead. | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:456 | RegExp() called with a `params` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:513 | RegExp() called with a `params` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:549 | RegExp() called with a `params` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:583 | RegExp() called with a `params` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:618 | RegExp() called with a `params` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:669 | RegExp() called with a `params` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:115 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:152 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:178 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:179 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:185 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:19 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:30 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string |
js/quiz-engine.js:318 | This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS).... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
test.js:17 | Detected that function argument `f` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
test.js:17 | Detected that function argument `f` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
test.js:26 | Detected that function argument `f` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| low | gitleaks/generic-api-key |
js/learn-legacy.js:1 | Possible generic-api-key secret in the current tree | Secrets (gitleaks) |
| low | gitleaks/generic-api-key |
js/learn.js.bak:1 | Possible generic-api-key secret in history (commit d7276f1deb); removed from the current tree but still retrievable | Secrets (gitleaks) |
| low | gitleaks/generic-api-key |
js/learn.js:1 | Possible generic-api-key secret in the current tree | Secrets (gitleaks) |
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 | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Coding style | AI provenance | ok | — | 0 | |
| Commit velocity | AI provenance | ok | prov-4 | 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 | 5 | |
| Tests and CI | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Type safety | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | Security | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Dependencies (osv-scanner) | Security | skipped | — | 0 | |
| 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 | 78 | |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | Security | skipped | — | 0 | no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo |
| Secrets (gitleaks) | Security | ok | gitleaks 8.30.1 | 3 |
Score history
Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.
| Scored | Commit | Scoring | AI provenance | Quality | Security |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-11-14 | 6c492d0b644b | prov-5+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 40 | 59 |
| 2026-11-14 | 6c492d0b644b | prov-4+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 40 | 59 |
Full text report
- Repository: https://github.com/MaykEu/DeepVault
- Commit:
6c492d0b644b1f6524f12c3ccf7fba57f070dcc6 - Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:01+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) | 0 | possible | 65% | 100% |
| Code quality | 40 | poor | 90% | 100% |
| Security | 59 | weak | 85% | 100% |
AI provenance
Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development. Comments and strings use phrasing typical of LLM-written code (see the coding style evidence).
-
Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
-
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 72.2%
-
Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%
-
Stylometry index: 3.49 per 1,000 lines (narrated steps 0, placeholders 0, assistant phrasing 0, emoji 34). Reported as a signal, not scored.
| Month | Lines added | Attributed to AI |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-07 | 46,259 | 0% |
Evidence
- 26,982 lines of first-party code in ~7.2h (3,745 lines/hour, 22 commit session) (a0c059610c57)
- 6,435 lines of first-party code in ~5.8h (1,112 lines/hour, 42 commit session) (31add3037b16)
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 poor: test-to-source ratio 0.01, no CI test run detected; 40% of function code in complex or long functions; 53% duplicated lines. Weakest area: duplication.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Complexity (lizard) | 30 |
| Duplication | 4 |
| Code smells (Opengrep) | 95 |
| Tests and CI | 21 |
| Documentation | 80 |
| Type safety | 40 |
| Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) | n/a |
- Functions: 318; mean complexity 4.9, 90th percentile 10; 25 complex and 4 long functions
- Duplicated lines: 53.4% of 19,165 compared
- Tests: 306 test lines for 25,282 source lines (ratio 0.01); CI test commands: none detected; 1% of recent source commits also change tests
- Docs missing or thin: changelog
Most complex functions:
- render in js/topic-hub.js: complexity 77, 216 lines
- main in convert.py: complexity 71, 187 lines
- hicpp in js/learn-legacy.js: complexity 52, 1 lines
- tokenize in js/code-highlight.js: complexity 43, 87 lines
- showQuestion in js/quiz-engine.js: complexity 39, 86 lines
Security
Security posture is weak: 61 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) | 90 |
| Static analysis (Opengrep) | 50 |
| Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) | n/a |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | n/a |
| Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) | 0 |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | n/a |
- Posture checks passed: lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits
Top findings
| Severity | Finding | Location |
|---|---|---|
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low] |
convert.py:288 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/dashboard.js:93 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a container.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/dashboard.js:93 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-3d.js:334 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a listDiv.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-3d.js:334 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:134 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a container.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:134 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:204 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a container.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:204 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:250 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a graphDiv.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:250 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:309 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a hintsDiv.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:309 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:332 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a feedbackDiv.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:332 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:413 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a container.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/exercises-dashboard.js:413 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/history.js:57 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a container.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/history.js:57 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/learn-legacy.js:1 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a c.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/learn-legacy.js:1 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a c.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method: User controlled data in methods like innerHTML, outerHTML or document.write is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 |
| high | opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a c.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] |
js/learn-legacy.js:3 |
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.
Repository profile
- Source lines: 25,282; test lines: 306
| Language | Lines |
|---|---|
| JavaScript | 24,611 |
| Python | 977 |