Leaderboard github.com

Wayn0/html2pdf

Convert HTML to PDF

View repository ↗
Rust
★ 0
commit 386ba40078de
scored 2026-11-14
scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

46%

explicit

Confidence: 72%
Coverage: 100%

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

Code quality

77/100

adequate

Confidence: 90%
Coverage: 100%

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

Security

60/100

weak

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

46% explicit

Explicit AI attribution on 46% of first-party code added; an estimated 46% including velocity signals.

How the score is built

Explicitly attributed share46%
Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
Estimated AI-generated share46%
AI tool configuration files2
Work sessions at AI pace0
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	5	1,312	2026-10-26	2026-10-28

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

2026-102,865 · 46% AI

Findings in AI-attributed lines vs the rest

From git blame: 850 lines trace to AI-attributed commits, 603 to others. Reported, not scored.

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

Evidence by analyzer

Explicit AI attributionok6 items

Claude Code: 5 attributed commits, 1,312 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'
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude'

attributed_commit_share: 50.0%
attributed_commits: 5
attributed_loc: 1,312
attributed_loc_share: 45.8%
commits: 10
effective_loc: 2,865
tools_detected: 1

AI tool configurationok2 items

artifacts: 2
earliest_adoption: 2026-10-24
tools_configured: 2
workflow_agents: 0

Commit velocityok

excluded_import_loc: 0
flagged_loc: 0
flagged_loc_share: 0.0%
flagged_units: 0
max_loc_per_hour: 358.25
measured_loc: 2,865
median_loc_per_hour: 83.69
pr_timed_units: 0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc: 0
pre_ai_era_bursts: 0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc: 0
work_units: 7

Release velocityok

flagged_releases: 0
max_loc_per_day: 3,230.40
releases: 6

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: 1,453
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: 850
blame_failures: 0
files_blamed: 4
other_lines: 603
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: 0
security:other_per_kloc: 0

Code quality

77 adequate

Code quality is adequate: test-to-source ratio 0.87, CI runs tests; 40% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.

How the score is built

Complexity30
Duplication100
Lint and smells100
Tests and CI100
Documentation65
Type safety40
Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok5 items

complex_functions: 5
function_nloc: 1,183
functions: 45
long_functions: 2
many_param_functions: 0
mean_ccn: 6.38
p90_ccn: 16
risky_nloc_share: 39.6%

Duplication (jscpd)ok

compared_lines: 1,144
duplicated_lines: 0
duplicated_share: 0.0%
files: 4

Lintok

findings: 0
scanned_lines: 1,453
weighted_findings: 0

Tests and CIok4 items

CI config: .github/workflows/ci.yml .github/workflows/ci.yml
CI config: .github/workflows/release.yml .github/workflows/release.yml
CI runs tests (go test, cargo test, unittest)
CI runs linters (clippy, rustfmt, cargo fmt)

check:ci_present: yes
check:ci_runs_lint: yes
check:ci_runs_tests: yes
check:has_tests: yes
check:test_ratio: yes
check:tests_cochange: yes
ci_files: 2
cochange_commits: 7
cochange_share: 100.0%
source_lines: 1,453
test_lines: 1,271
test_ratio: 0.87

Documentationok2 items

README.md README.md
LICENSE LICENSE

check:changelog: no
check:contributing: no
check:license: yes
check:readme: yes
readme_lines: 278

Type safetyok

check:low_escape_density: yes
check:strict_config: no
escapes: 0
escapes_per_kloc: 0

Security

60 weak

Security posture is weak: 2 known vulnerabilities in 2 dependencies; 2 high-severity SAST findings; 10 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

Secrets100
Static analysis (SAST)42
Vulnerable dependencies90
CI workflows15
Security posture0
OpenSSF Scorecardnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

OpenSSF Scorecardskipped

no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo

Package registriesok

checked: 7
declared: 7
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: 2
findings_high: 2
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 0
parse_errors: 0
scanned_lines: 1,453
weighted_findings: 3.60

Dependencies (osv-scanner)ok

penalty: 6
vulnerabilities: 2
vulnerable_packages: 2
vulns_critical: 0
vulns_high: 0
vulns_low: 0
vulns_medium: 0
vulns_unknown: 2

CI workflows (zizmor)ok

findings: 13
findings_high: 10
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 3
penalty: 115.20
workflows: 2

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 downloadsok6 items

binary_assets: 14
signals: 2
suspicious: 0

Findings

12 high5 medium

Severity	Rule	Location	Message	Tool
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/ci.yml:11	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/ci.yml:12	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/ci.yml:15	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:18	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:26	runtime artifacts potentially vulnerable to a cache poisoning attack [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:26	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:46	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:84	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/release.yml:98	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`opengrep/dockerfile.security.missing-user-entrypoint`	Dockerfile:14	By not specifying a USER, a program in the container may run as 'root'. This is a security hazard. If an attacker can control a process running as root, they may have control over the container. Ensure that the last USER in a Dockerfile...	Static analysis (opengrep)
high	`opengrep/dockerfile.security.missing-user`	Dockerfile:15	By not specifying a USER, a program in the container may run as 'root'. This is a security hazard. If an attacker can control a process running as root, they may have control over the container. Ensure that the last USER in a Dockerfile...	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`	.github/workflows/ci.yml:11	credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`	.github/workflows/release.yml:18	credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`	.github/workflows/release.yml:46	credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`osv/RUSTSEC-2025-0141`	Cargo.lock	[email protected] (crates.io) is affected by RUSTSEC-2025-0141	Dependencies (osv-scanner)
medium	`osv/RUSTSEC-2026-0486`	Cargo.lock	[email protected] (crates.io) is affected by RUSTSEC-2026-0486	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	ok	`—`	0
CI workflows (zizmor)	Security	ok	`zizmor 1.32.0`	13
Dependencies (osv-scanner)	Security	ok	`osv-scanner version: 2.7.1`	2
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`	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	`386ba40078de`	`prov-5+qual-2+sec-2`	46%	77	60
2026-11-14	`386ba40078de`	`prov-4+qual-2+sec-2`	46%	77	60

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/Wayn0/html2pdf/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/Wayn0/html2pdf/)

[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/Wayn0/html2pdf/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/Wayn0/html2pdf/)

[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/Wayn0/html2pdf/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/Wayn0/html2pdf/)

Full text report

Repository: https://github.com/Wayn0/html2pdf
Commit: 386ba40078de3fe9c6807e73307bfa546aa6ebad
Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:02+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)	46	explicit	72%	100%
Code quality	77	adequate	90%	100%
Security	60	weak	85%	100%

AI provenance

Explicit AI attribution on 46% of first-party code added; an estimated 46% including velocity signals.

Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 45.8%
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
Estimated AI-generated share: 45.8%

AI tool	Attributed commits	Lines added
Claude Code	5	1,312

AI tooling configured in repo: claude-code, generic-agent

Current source lines last changed by AI-attributed commits: 850 of 1,453.

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

Month	Lines added	Attributed to AI
2026-10	2,865	46%

Evidence

Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (386ba40078de)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (f591d5bb06a5)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (174e14af0222)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (ef23517b3f66)
Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (2fa874896761)
CLAUDE.md (claude-code configuration) (CLAUDE.md)
AGENTS.md (generic-agent configuration) (AGENTS.md)

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 0.87, CI runs tests; 40% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.

Area	Score
Complexity (lizard)	30
Duplication	100
Code smells (Opengrep)	100
Tests and CI	100
Documentation	65
Type safety	40
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance)	n/a

Functions: 45; mean complexity 6.4, 90th percentile 16; 5 complex and 2 long functions
Duplicated lines: 0.0% of 1,144 compared
Tests: 1,271 test lines for 1,453 source lines (ratio 0.87); CI test commands: go test, cargo test, unittest; 100% of recent source commits also change tests
Docs missing or thin: contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is weak: 2 known vulnerabilities in 2 dependencies; 2 high-severity SAST findings; 10 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

Area	Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history)	100
Static analysis (Opengrep)	42
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV)	90
CI workflows (zizmor)	15
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles)	0
OpenSSF Scorecard	n/a

Known vulnerabilities: 2 in 2 packages (critical 0, high 0, medium 0, low 0)
Posture checks passed: lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits

Top findings

Severity	Finding	Location
high	`opengrep/dockerfile.security.missing-user-entrypoint`: By not specifying a USER, a program in the container may run as 'root'. This is a security hazard. If an attacker can control a process running as root, they may have control over the container. Ensure that the last USER in a Dockerfile is a USER other than 'root'. [confidence medium]	Dockerfile:14
high	`opengrep/dockerfile.security.missing-user`: By not specifying a USER, a program in the container may run as 'root'. This is a security hazard. If an attacker can control a process running as root, they may have control over the container. Ensure that the last USER in a Dockerfile is a USER other than 'root'. [confidence medium]	Dockerfile:15
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/ci.yml:11
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/ci.yml:12
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/ci.yml:15
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:18
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:26
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:46
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:84
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/release.yml:98
high	`zizmor/cache-poisoning`: runtime artifacts potentially vulnerable to a cache poisoning attack [confidence low]	.github/workflows/release.yml:26
medium	`osv/RUSTSEC-2025-0141`: [email protected] (crates.io) is affected by RUSTSEC-2025-0141	Cargo.lock
medium	`osv/RUSTSEC-2026-0486`: [email protected] (crates.io) is affected by RUSTSEC-2026-0486	Cargo.lock
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	.github/workflows/ci.yml:11
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	.github/workflows/release.yml:18
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	.github/workflows/release.yml:46

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 v0.2.4 ships html2pdf-v0.2.4-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.tar.gz (0 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.2.4 ships html2pdf-v0.2.4-x86_64-unknown-linux-musl.tar.gz (2 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.2.3 ships html2pdf-v0.2.3-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.tar.gz (0 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.2.3 ships html2pdf-v0.2.3-x86_64-unknown-linux-musl.tar.gz (1 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release v0.2.2 ships html2pdf-v0.2.2-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.tar.gz (1 downloads)
readme-download-lure: gives an archive password

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: 1,453; test lines: 1,271

Language	Lines
Rust	2,608
Python	116