RepoTrust

Leaderboard github.com

amaarora/x-linear

Save tweets to Linear with one click. Full content extraction. 100% vibe coded.

  • View repository ↗
  • JavaScript
  • ★ 0
  • commit e3d351155319
  • scored 2026-11-14
  • scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

0%

none-detected

Confidence
40%
Coverage
100%

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

Code quality

58/100

weak

Confidence
90%
Coverage
100%

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

Security

65/100

weak

Confidence
85%
Coverage
100%

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

Dispute or request a re-score Full report JSON RepoTrust ai badgeRepoTrust quality badgeRepoTrust security badge

AI provenance

0% none-detected

No AI attribution or AI-consistent velocity signals detected.

How the score is built

  • Explicitly attributed share0%
  • Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
  • Estimated AI-generated share0%
  • AI tool configuration files0
  • Work sessions at AI pace0
  • Releases at AI pacenot measured
  • Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.00

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

  1. 2025-12248 · 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
1
effective_loc
248
tools_detected
0
AI tool configurationok
artifacts
0
tools_configured
0
workflow_agents
0
Commit velocityok
excluded_import_loc
0
flagged_loc
0
flagged_loc_share
0.0%
flagged_units
0
max_loc_per_hour
62
measured_loc
248
median_loc_per_hour
62
pr_timed_units
0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc
0
pre_ai_era_bursts
0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc
0
work_units
1
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
248
per_kloc:assistant_voice
0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code
0
per_kloc:narrated_steps
0
per_kloc:placeholder
0

Code quality

58 weak

Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

How the score is built

  • Complexity100
  • Duplication100
  • Lint and smells54
  • Tests and CI0
  • Documentation65
  • Type safetynot measured
  • Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok
complex_functions
0
function_nloc
210
functions
12
long_functions
0
many_param_functions
0
mean_ccn
3.67
p90_ccn
7
risky_nloc_share
0.0%
Duplication (jscpd)ok
compared_lines
155
duplicated_lines
0
duplicated_share
0.0%
files
1
Lintok
category:correctness
4
findings
4
scanned_lines
248
weighted_findings
2.50
Tests and CIok
check:ci_present
no
check:ci_runs_lint
no
check:ci_runs_tests
no
check:has_tests
no
check:test_ratio
no
check:tests_cochange
no
ci_files
0
cochange_commits
1
cochange_share
0.0%
source_lines
248
test_lines
0
test_ratio
0
Documentationok2 items
  • README.md README.md
  • LICENSE LICENSE
check:changelog
no
check:contributing
no
check:license
yes
check:readme
yes
readme_lines
38
Type safetyskipped

Security

65 weak

Security posture is weak: 2 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

  • Secrets100
  • Static analysis (SAST)54
  • 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
0
secrets_nonprod
0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
findings
3
findings_high
2
findings_low
0
findings_medium
1
parse_errors
0
scanned_lines
248
weighted_findings
1.75
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

2 high3 medium2 low

SeverityRuleLocationMessageTool
high opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-document-method popup.js:246 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 popup.js:246 User controlled data in a `status.innerHTML` is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.correctness.no-stringify-keys popup.js:174 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.correctness.no-stringify-keys popup.js:230 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.html-in-template-string popup.js:92 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)
low opengrep/javascript.lang.correctness.missing-template-string-indicator popup.js:150 This looks like a JavaScript template string. Are you missing a '$' in front of '{...}'? Lint
low opengrep/javascript.lang.correctness.missing-template-string-indicator popup.js:150 This looks like a JavaScript template string. Are you missing a '$' in front of '{...}'? Lint

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.

AnalyzerPillarStatusVersionFindingsNote
AI tool configurationAI provenanceoksignatures-v10
Explicit AI attributionAI provenanceoksignatures-v10
Release velocityAI provenanceskipped—0
Coding styleAI provenanceok—0
Commit velocityAI provenanceokprov-40
Complexity (lizard)Code qualityoklizard 1.25.10
DocumentationCode qualityok—0
Duplication (jscpd)Code qualityokrepotrust-dup-w60
LintCode qualityokopengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b4144
Tests and CICode qualityok—0
Type safetyCode qualityskipped—0
CI workflows (zizmor)Securityskipped—0
Dependencies (osv-scanner)Securityskipped—0
Release downloadsSecurityok—0
Security postureSecurityok—0
Package registriesSecurityskipped—0no registry dependencies declared
Static analysis (opengrep)Securityokopengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b4143
OpenSSF ScorecardSecurityskipped—0no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo
Secrets (gitleaks)Securityokgitleaks 8.30.10

Score history

Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.

ScoredCommitScoringAI provenanceQualitySecurity
2026-11-14e3d351155319prov-5+qual-2+sec-20%5865
2026-11-14e3d351155319prov-4+qual-2+sec-20%5865

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/amaarora/x-linear/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/amaarora/x-linear/)
[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/amaarora/x-linear/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/amaarora/x-linear/)
[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/amaarora/x-linear/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/amaarora/x-linear/)
Full text report
  • Repository: https://github.com/amaarora/x-linear
  • Commit: e3d3511553194a5d36a6d21bee05d88aa82b7a3e
  • 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) 0 none-detected 40% 100%
Code quality 58 weak 90% 100%
Security 65 weak 85% 100%

AI provenance

No AI attribution or AI-consistent velocity signals detected.

  • Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
  • Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
  • Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%
Month Lines added Attributed to AI
2025-12 248 0%

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 weak: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area Score
Complexity (lizard) 100
Duplication 100
Code smells (Opengrep) 54
Tests and CI 0
Documentation 65
Type safety n/a
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) n/a
  • Functions: 12; mean complexity 3.7, 90th percentile 7; 0 complex and 0 long functions
  • Duplicated lines: 0.0% of 155 compared
  • Tests: 0 test lines for 248 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
  • Docs missing or thin: contributing, changelog

Security

Security posture is weak: 2 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.

Area Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) 100
Static analysis (Opengrep) 54
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/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] popup.js:246
high opengrep/javascript.browser.security.insecure-innerhtml: User controlled data in a status.innerHTML is an anti-pattern that can lead to XSS vulnerabilities [confidence low] popup.js:246
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string: 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). [confidence low] popup.js:92

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: 248; test lines: 0
Language Lines
JavaScript 248