Leaderboard github.com
MisterBooo/LeetCodeAnimation
Demonstrate all the questions on LeetCode in the form of animation.（用动画的形式呈现解LeetCode题目的思路,完整单步/回看/变速/语音讲解在 algomooc.com）
AI provenance
6%
explicit
- Confidence
- 95%
- Coverage
- 100%
Estimated share of AI-generated code. Explicit attribution is a lower bound.
Code quality
48/100
poor
- Confidence
- 90%
- Coverage
- 100%
Complexity, duplication, lint density, tests, CI, docs and review process.
Security
62/100
weak
- Confidence
- 85%
- Coverage
- 100%
Secrets, static analysis, vulnerable dependencies, CI and supply-chain posture.
AI provenance
6% explicit
Explicit AI attribution on 5% of first-party code added; an estimated 5% including velocity signals.
How the score is built
- Explicitly attributed share5%
- Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
- Estimated AI-generated share5%
- AI tool configuration files0
- Work sessions at AI pace0
- Releases at AI pacenot measured
- Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.00
Attributed AI tools
| Tool | Commits | Lines added | First seen | Last seen |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 4 | 407 | 2026-06-12 | 2026-06-12 |
Lines added per month all AI-attributed share
- 2018-125,718 · 0% AI
- 2019-01250 · 0% AI
- 2019-020 · 0% AI
- 2019-050 · 0% AI
- 2019-060 · 0% AI
- 2019-070 · 0% AI
- 2019-080 · 0% AI
- 2019-090 · 0% AI
- 2019-100 · 0% AI
- 2019-110 · 0% AI
- 2020-010 · 0% AI
- 2020-030 · 0% AI
- 2020-04338 · 0% AI
- 2020-05153 · 0% AI
- 2020-060 · 0% AI
- 2020-070 · 0% AI
- 2020-080 · 0% AI
- 2020-090 · 0% AI
- 2021-060 · 0% AI
- 2022-010 · 0% AI
- 2026-06970 · 42% AI
Findings in AI-attributed lines vs the rest
From git blame: 325 lines trace to AI-attributed commits, 939 to others. Too few lines in one group for a fair comparison. Reported, not scored.
| Findings per 1,000 lines | AI-attributed | Other | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Code quality | 0.00 | 1.06 | — |
| Security | 12.31 | 18.10 | — |
Evidence by analyzer
Explicit AI attributionok5 items
- Claude Code: 4 attributed commits, 407 lines added
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude'
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude'
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude'
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude'
- attributed_commit_share
- 2.2%
- attributed_commits
- 4
- attributed_loc
- 407
- attributed_loc_share
- 5.5%
- commits
- 183
- effective_loc
- 7,429
- tools_detected
- 1
AI tool configurationok
- artifacts
- 0
- tools_configured
- 0
- workflow_agents
- 0
Commit velocityok
- excluded_import_loc
- 5,556
- flagged_loc
- 0
- flagged_loc_share
- 0.0%
- flagged_units
- 0
- max_loc_per_hour
- 130.50
- measured_loc
- 1,873
- median_loc_per_hour
- 62.50
- pr_timed_units
- 0
- pre_ai_era_burst_loc
- 0
- pre_ai_era_bursts
- 0
- pre_ai_era_measured_loc
- 903
- work_units
- 11
Release velocityskipped
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
- 1,264
- 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
- 325
- blame_failures
- 0
- files_blamed
- 22
- other_lines
- 939
- quality:ai_findings
- 0
- quality:ai_per_kloc
- 0
- quality:other_findings
- 1
- quality:other_per_kloc
- 1.06
- security:ai_findings
- 4
- security:ai_per_kloc
- 12.31
- security:other_findings
- 17
- security:other_per_kloc
- 18.10
Code quality
48 poor
Code quality is poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 32% duplicated lines. Weakest area: duplication.
How the score is built
- Complexity100
- Duplication14
- Lint and smells82
- Tests and CI15
- Documentation55
- Type safety40
- Review process25
Evidence by analyzer
Complexity (lizard)ok
- complex_functions
- 0
- function_nloc
- 717
- functions
- 103
- long_functions
- 0
- many_param_functions
- 0
- mean_ccn
- 2.21
- p90_ccn
- 4
- risky_nloc_share
- 0.0%
Duplication (jscpd)ok3 items
- 6+ duplicated lines: docs/readme-revamp/build-readme.js:1 and tools/scripts/build-readme.js:1
- 6+ duplicated lines: problems/0034-find-first-and-last-position-of-element-in-sorted-array/Code/1.java:8 and problems/0035-search-insert-position/Code/2.java:10
- 6+ duplicated lines: tools/scripts/review-site-changes.js:35 and tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:47
- compared_lines
- 881
- duplicated_lines
- 286
- duplicated_share
- 32.5%
- files
- 22
Lintok
- category:correctness
- 1
- findings
- 1
- scanned_lines
- 1,264
- weighted_findings
- 1
Tests and CIok1 item
- CI config: .github/workflows/manifest.yml
.github/workflows/manifest.yml
- check:ci_present
- yes
- check:ci_runs_lint
- no
- check:ci_runs_tests
- no
- check:has_tests
- no
- check:test_ratio
- no
- check:tests_cochange
- no
- ci_files
- 1
- cochange_commits
- 16
- cochange_share
- 0.0%
- source_lines
- 1,264
- test_lines
- 0
- test_ratio
- 0
Documentationok2 items
- README.md
README.md - docs/contributing.md
docs/contributing.md
- check:changelog
- no
- check:contributing
- yes
- check:license
- no
- check:readme
- yes
- readme_lines
- 146
Type safetyok
- check:low_escape_density
- yes
- check:strict_config
- no
- escapes
- 0
- escapes_per_kloc
- 0
Security
62 weak
Security posture is weak: 2 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.
How the score is built
- Secrets100
- Static analysis (SAST)23
- Vulnerable dependencies100
- CI workflows63
- Security posture0
- OpenSSF Scorecard29
Evidence by analyzer
OpenSSF Scorecardok12 items
- Scorecard Maintained: 0/10 (0 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 0)
- Scorecard Code-Review: 5/10 (Found 11/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 5)
- Scorecard Token-Permissions: 0/10 (detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions)
- Scorecard Dangerous-Workflow: 10/10 (no dangerous workflow patterns detected)
- Scorecard Binary-Artifacts: 10/10 (no binaries found in the repo)
- Scorecard CII-Best-Practices: 0/10 (no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected)
- Scorecard Security-Policy: 0/10 (security policy file not detected)
- Scorecard License: 0/10 (license file not detected)
- Scorecard Fuzzing: 0/10 (project is not fuzzed)
- Scorecard Branch-Protection: 0/10 (branch protection not enabled on development/release branches)
- Scorecard SAST: 0/10 (SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0)
- Scorecard Pinned-Dependencies: 0/10 (dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0)
- aggregate
- 2.90
- check:Binary-Artifacts
- yes
- check:Branch-Protection
- no
- check:CII-Best-Practices
- no
- check:Code-Review
- yes
- check:Dangerous-Workflow
- yes
- check:Fuzzing
- no
- check:License
- no
- check:Maintained
- no
- check:Pinned-Dependencies
- no
- check:SAST
- no
- check:Security-Policy
- no
- check:Token-Permissions
- no
Package registriesok
- checked
- 1
- declared
- 1
- lookup_errors
- 0
- missing
- 0
- recent
- 0
Secrets (gitleaks)ok
- secrets_current
- 0
- secrets_history
- 0
- secrets_low_confidence
- 0
- secrets_nonprod
- 0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
- findings
- 21
- findings_high
- 0
- findings_low
- 0
- findings_medium
- 21
- parse_errors
- 0
- scanned_lines
- 1,264
- weighted_findings
- 5.25
Dependencies (osv-scanner)ok
- penalty
- 0
- vulnerabilities
- 0
- vulnerable_packages
- 0
- vulns_critical
- 0
- vulns_high
- 0
- vulns_low
- 0
- vulns_medium
- 0
- vulns_unknown
- 0
CI workflows (zizmor)ok
- findings
- 4
- findings_high
- 2
- findings_low
- 0
- findings_medium
- 2
- penalty
- 27.60
- workflows
- 1
Security postureok1 item
- package.json has no lockfile alongside it (unpinned dependencies)
package.json
- check:dependency_updates
- no
- check:lockfiles
- no
- check:security_policy
- no
- check:signed_commits
- no
- signed_commit_share
- 16.9%
- unpinned_manifests
- 1
Release downloadsok
- binary_assets
- 0
- signals
- 0
- suspicious
- 0
Findings
2 high24 medium
26 findings
| Severity | Rule | Location | Message | Tool |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:11 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:12 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| medium | opengrep/python.lang.correctness.use-sys-exit |
tools/anima/create.py:13 | Detected use of `exit`. Use `sys.exit` over the python shell `exit` built-in. `exit` is a helper for the interactive shell and may not be available on all Python implementations. | Lint |
| medium | zizmor/artipacked |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:11 | credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| medium | zizmor/excessive-permissions |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:8 | overly broad permissions [confidence medium] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
docs/readme-revamp/build-readme.js:117 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
docs/readme-revamp/build-readme.js:117 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
tools/scripts/build-readme.js:117 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
tools/scripts/build-readme.js:117 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
tools/scripts/review-site-changes.js:36 | Detected that function argument `file` 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.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:100 | Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:100 | Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:192 | Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:193 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:193 | Detected that function argument `file` 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.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:197 | Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:198 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:199 | Detected that function argument `file` 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.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:42 | Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:43 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:44 | Detected that function argument `file` 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 |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:48 | Detected that function argument `file` 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.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:92 | Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:93 | Detected that function argument `dir` 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 |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:98 | Detected that function argument `dir` 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-redos |
tools/scripts/validate-manifest.js:39 | Detected the use of a regular expression `^[a-z0-9]+(-[a-z0-9]+)*$` which appears to be vulnerable to a Regular expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS). For this reason, it is recommended to review the regex and ensure it is not vulnerable... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
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-5 | 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 | 1 | |
| Tests and CI | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Type safety | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | Security | ok | zizmor 1.32.0 | 4 | |
| Dependencies (osv-scanner) | Security | ok | osv-scanner version: 2.7.1 | 0 | |
| Release downloads | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Security posture | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Package registries | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Static analysis (opengrep) | Security | ok | opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414 | 21 | |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | Security | ok | scorecard v5.6.0 | 0 | |
| Secrets (gitleaks) | Security | ok | gitleaks 8.30.1 | 0 |
Score history
| Scored | Commit | Scoring | AI provenance | Quality | Security |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-11-14 | e853d7a5a893 | prov-5+qual-2+sec-2 | 6% | 48 | 62 |
Full text report
- Repository: https://github.com/MisterBooo/LeetCodeAnimation
- Commit:
e853d7a5a893292b9d4636c78c080daf11552c81 - Generated: 2026-11-14T16:37:44+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) | 6 | explicit | 95% | 100% |
| Code quality | 48 | poor | 90% | 100% |
| Security | 62 | weak | 85% | 100% |
AI provenance
Explicit AI attribution on 5% of first-party code added; an estimated 5% including velocity signals.
- Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 5.5%
- Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
- Estimated AI-generated share: 5.5%
| AI tool | Attributed commits | Lines added |
|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 4 | 407 |
Current source lines last changed by AI-attributed commits: 325 of 1,264.
Too few lines in one group to compare finding densities.
| Month | Lines added | Attributed to AI |
|---|---|---|
| 2018-12 | 5,718 | 0% |
| 2019-01 | 250 | 0% |
| 2020-04 | 338 | 0% |
| 2020-05 | 153 | 0% |
| 2026-06 | 970 | 42% |
Evidence
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (e853d7a5a893)
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (dc713cda0ed0)
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (0b36a61b19a9)
- Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (514d33ee9ff8)
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 0.00, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 32% duplicated lines. Weakest area: duplication.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Complexity (lizard) | 100 |
| Duplication | 14 |
| Code smells (Opengrep) | 82 |
| Tests and CI | 15 |
| Documentation | 55 |
| Type safety | 40 |
| Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) | 25 |
- Functions: 103; mean complexity 2.2, 90th percentile 4; 0 complex and 0 long functions
- Duplicated lines: 32.5% of 881 compared
- Tests: 0 test lines for 1,264 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
- Docs missing or thin: license, changelog
Security
Security posture is weak: 2 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) | 100 |
| Static analysis (Opengrep) | 23 |
| Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) | 100 |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | 63 |
| Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) | 0 |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | 29 |
- Posture checks passed: none; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits, lockfiles
- OpenSSF Scorecard aggregate: 2.9/10 (published 2026-11-09)
Top findings
| Severity | Finding | Location |
|---|---|---|
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:11 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:12 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
docs/readme-revamp/build-readme.js:117 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
docs/readme-revamp/build-readme.js:117 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/build-readme.js:117 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/build-readme.js:117 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/review-site-changes.js:36 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal: Detected possible user input going into a path.join or path.resolve function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:42 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:43 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:44 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:48 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal: Detected possible user input going into a path.join or path.resolve function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:92 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument dir 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:93 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument dir 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:98 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal: Detected possible user input going into a path.join or path.resolve function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:100 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal: Detected possible user input going into a path.join or path.resolve function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:100 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal: Detected possible user input going into a path.join or path.resolve function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:192 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:193 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:193 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal: Detected possible user input going into a path.join or path.resolve function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:197 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:198 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename: Detected that function argument file 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 variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/sync-algomooc-index.js:199 |
| medium | opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-redos: Detected the use of a regular expression ^[a-z0-9]+(-[a-z0-9]+)*$ which appears to be vulnerable to a Regular expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS). For this reason, it is recommended to review the regex and ensure it is not vulnerable to catastrophic backtracking, and if possible use a library whi [confidence low] |
tools/scripts/validate-manifest.js:39 |
| medium | zizmor/artipacked: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:11 |
| medium | zizmor/excessive-permissions: overly broad permissions [confidence medium] |
.github/workflows/manifest.yml:8 |
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: 1,264; test lines: 0
| Language | Lines |
|---|---|
| JavaScript | 840 |
| Java | 303 |
| Python | 102 |
| C++ | 19 |