Leaderboard github.com

aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot

A matrix bot that automatically replies with a link to alternative frontends

View repository ↗
Python
★ 1
commit 4f06ced27d8a
scored 2026-11-14
scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

100%

explicit

Confidence: 90%
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

69/100

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

100% explicit

Explicit AI attribution on 100% of first-party code added; an estimated 100% including velocity signals.

How the score is built

Explicitly attributed share100%
Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
Estimated AI-generated share100%
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
Jules	11	512	2025-06-25	2025-06-26
GitHub Copilot coding agent	9	298	2025-08-05	2026-01-28

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

2021-030 · 0% AI
2021-040 · 0% AI
2021-050 · 0% AI
2021-060 · 0% AI
2021-080 · 0% AI
2022-010 · 0% AI
2022-030 · 0% AI
2022-110 · 0% AI
2025-06512 · 100% AI
2025-0891 · 100% AI
2026-01207 · 100% AI

Findings in AI-attributed lines vs the rest

From git blame: 422 lines trace to AI-attributed commits, 0 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	4.74	—	—
Security	2.37	—	—

Evidence by analyzer

Explicit AI attributionok22 items

attributed_commit_share: 24.4%
attributed_commits: 20
attributed_loc: 810
attributed_loc_share: 100.0%
commits: 82
effective_loc: 810
tools_detected: 2

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: 60
measured_loc: 810
median_loc_per_hour: 51.25
pr_timed_units: 0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc: 0
pre_ai_era_bursts: 0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc: 0
work_units: 6

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: 422
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: 422
blame_failures: 0
files_blamed: 1
other_lines: 0
quality:ai_findings: 2
quality:ai_per_kloc: 4.74
quality:other_findings: 0
security:ai_findings: 1
security:ai_per_kloc: 2.37
security:other_findings: 0

Code quality

58 weak

Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.44, no CI test run detected; 49% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.

How the score is built

Complexity23
Duplication100
Lint and smells61
Tests and CI60
Documentation65
Type safety40
Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok2 items

complex_functions: 2
function_nloc: 237
functions: 10
long_functions: 0
many_param_functions: 0
mean_ccn: 6.80
p90_ccn: 16
risky_nloc_share: 49.4%

Duplication (jscpd)ok

compared_lines: 326
duplicated_lines: 0
duplicated_share: 0.0%
files: 1

Lintok

category:best-practice: 2
findings: 2
scanned_lines: 422
weighted_findings: 2

Tests and CIok1 item

CI config: .github/workflows/docker-publish.yml .github/workflows/docker-publish.yml

check:ci_present: yes
check:ci_runs_lint: no
check:ci_runs_tests: no
check:has_tests: yes
check:test_ratio: no
check:tests_cochange: no
ci_files: 1
cochange_commits: 13
cochange_share: 7.7%
source_lines: 422
test_lines: 187
test_ratio: 0.44

Documentationok2 items

README.md README.md
LICENSE LICENSE

check:changelog: no
check:contributing: no
check:license: yes
check:readme: yes
readme_lines: 60

Type safetyok

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

Security

69 weak

Security posture is weak: 6 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

Secrets100
Static analysis (SAST)92
Vulnerable dependenciesnot measured
CI workflows34
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: 1
findings_high: 0
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 1
parse_errors: 0
scanned_lines: 422
weighted_findings: 0.25

Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped

CI workflows (zizmor)ok

findings: 7
findings_high: 6
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 1
penalty: 64.80
workflows: 1

Security postureok

check:dependency_updates: no
check:lockfiles: yes
check:security_policy: no
check:signed_commits: no
signed_commit_share: 29.3%
unpinned_manifests: 0

Release downloadsok1 item

gives an archive password README.md

binary_assets: 0
signals: 1
suspicious: 0

Findings

6 high4 medium

Severity	Rule	Location	Message	Tool
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:23	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/cache-poisoning`	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:26	runtime artifacts potentially vulnerable to a cache poisoning attack [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:26	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:31	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:39	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:47	unpinned action reference [confidence high]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding`	matrix_bot.py:142	Missing 'encoding' parameter. 'open()' uses device locale encodings by default, corrupting files with special characters. Specify the encoding to ensure cross-platform support when opening files in text mode (e.g. encoding="utf-8").	Lint
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding`	matrix_bot.py:153	Missing 'encoding' parameter. 'open()' uses device locale encodings by default, corrupting files with special characters. Specify the encoding to ensure cross-platform support when opening files in text mode (e.g. encoding="utf-8").	Lint
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:22	credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	CI workflows (zizmor)
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.regex_dos`	matrix_bot.py:189	Detected usage of re.compile with an inefficient regular expression. This can lead to regular expression denial of service, which can result in service down time. Instead, check all regexes or use safer alternatives such as pyre2....	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-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`	2
Tests and CI	Code quality	ok	`—`	0
Type safety	Code quality	ok	`—`	0
CI workflows (zizmor)	Security	ok	`zizmor 1.32.0`	7
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`	1
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	`4f06ced27d8a`	`prov-5+qual-2+sec-2`	100%	58	69
2026-11-14	`4f06ced27d8a`	`prov-4+qual-2+sec-2`	100%	58	69

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/aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot/)

[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot/)

[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot/)

Full text report

Repository: https://github.com/aosus/matrix-privacy-link-bot
Commit: 4f06ced27d8abcc0ee79b47cb1bc7dcc1e80b521
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)	100	explicit	90%	100%
Code quality	58	weak	90%	100%
Security	69	weak	85%	100%

AI provenance

Explicit AI attribution on 100% of first-party code added; an estimated 100% including velocity signals.

Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 100.0%
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
Estimated AI-generated share: 100.0%

AI tool	Attributed commits	Lines added
Jules	11	512
GitHub Copilot coding agent	9	298

Current source lines last changed by AI-attributed commits: 422 of 422.

Too few lines in one group to compare finding densities.

Month	Lines added	Attributed to AI
2025-06	512	100%
2025-08	91	100%
2026-01	207	100%

Evidence

GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (4dd511f03c7b)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (0ade7bc7ef36)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (eb9e0a83132e)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (8013a93c7030)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (0deffa98441f)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (c14cd999c967)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (f03cf9a405e0)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (95e2286744e8)
GitHub Copilot coding agent: author copilot-swe-agent[bot] (cdf0cf1d8a57)
Jules: author google-labs-jules[bot] (0cec670d83cf)
Jules: author google-labs-jules[bot] (ee7e3c9fddb0)
Jules: author google-labs-jules[bot] (03ab72b127dc)
Jules: author google-labs-jules[bot] (38b115ad6a3a)
Jules: author google-labs-jules[bot] (3d0cfe9af985)
Jules: author google-labs-jules[bot] (3d1071bff42a)

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 0.44, no CI test run detected; 49% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.

Area	Score
Complexity (lizard)	23
Duplication	100
Code smells (Opengrep)	61
Tests and CI	60
Documentation	65
Type safety	40
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance)	n/a

Functions: 10; mean complexity 6.8, 90th percentile 16; 2 complex and 0 long functions
Duplicated lines: 0.0% of 326 compared
Tests: 187 test lines for 422 source lines (ratio 0.44); CI test commands: none detected; 8% of recent source commits also change tests
Docs missing or thin: contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is weak: 6 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

Area	Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history)	100
Static analysis (Opengrep)	92
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV)	n/a
CI workflows (zizmor)	34
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	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:23
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:26
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:31
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:39
high	`zizmor/unpinned-uses`: unpinned action reference [confidence high]	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:47
high	`zizmor/cache-poisoning`: runtime artifacts potentially vulnerable to a cache poisoning attack [confidence low]	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:26
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.regex_dos`: Detected usage of re.compile with an inefficient regular expression. This can lead to regular expression denial of service, which can result in service down time. Instead, check all regexes or use safer alternatives such as pyre2. [confidence low]	matrix_bot.py:189
medium	`zizmor/artipacked`: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low]	.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:22

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

Distribution signals

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: 422; test lines: 187

Language	Lines
Python	609