apenwarr/sshuttle
Wrong project! You should head over to http://github.com/sshuttle/sshuttle
- Repository: https://github.com/apenwarr/sshuttle
- Commit:
083293ea0dc2ebc77f282c2803720a2bb5f21a80 - Generated: 2026-11-13T23:20:23+00:00
- Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-4+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2
Scores
| Pillar | Score | Signal | Confidence | Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) | 0 | none-detected | 65% | 100% |
| Code quality | 57 | weak | 90% | 100% |
| Security | 70 | adequate | 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%
-
Stylometry index: 0.25 per 1,000 lines (narrated steps 1, placeholders 0, assistant phrasing 0, emoji 0). Reported as a signal, not scored.
| Month | Lines added | Attributed to AI |
|---|---|---|
| 2014-09 | 580 | 0% |
| 2014-10 | 1 | 0% |
| 2015-03 | 318 | 0% |
| 2015-04 | 28 | 0% |
| 2015-05 | 3 | 0% |
| 2015-06 | 1 | 0% |
| 2015-07 | 1 | 0% |
| 2015-09 | 48 | 0% |
| 2015-11 | 2,645 | 0% |
| 2015-12 | 851 | 0% |
| 2016-01 | 412 | 0% |
| 2016-03 | 404 | 0% |
Evidence
- step-by-step narration comment: # Now we wait until EOF or any other kind of exception. We need (sshuttle/fir)
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 0.28, CI runs tests; 23% of function code in complex or long functions; 5% duplicated lines. Weakest area: lint.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Complexity (lizard) | 50 |
| Duplication | 73 |
| Code smells (Opengrep) | 9 |
| Tests and CI | 72 |
| Documentation | 85 |
| Type safety | 40 |
| Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) | n/a |
- Functions: 223; mean complexity 4.0, 90th percentile 8; 7 complex and 2 long functions
- Duplicated lines: 5.2% of 3,273 compared
- Tests: 1,134 test lines for 4,039 source lines (ratio 0.28); CI test commands: pytest; 7% of recent source commits also change tests
- Docs missing or thin: contributing
Most complex functions:
- main in sshuttle/client.py: complexity 57, 163 lines
- main in sshuttle/firewall.py: complexity 52, 150 lines
- main in sshuttle/cmdline.py: complexity 34, 90 lines
- _main in sshuttle/client.py: complexity 20, 68 lines
- _gen_usage in sshuttle/options.py: complexity 19, 61 lines
Security
Security posture is adequate: 11 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) | 100 |
| Static analysis (Opengrep) | 38 |
| Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) | 100 |
| 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 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/client.py:202 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-tainted-env-args: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' with user controlled data. A malicious actor could leverage this to perform command injection. You may consider using 'shlex.quote()'. [confidence medium] |
sshuttle/client.py:202 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/hostwatch.py:124 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/hostwatch.py:144 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/hostwatch.py:201 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/linux.py:21 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'call' 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] |
sshuttle/linux.py:38 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/methods/pf.py:329 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/server.py:63 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' 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] |
sshuttle/ssh.py:124 |
| high | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-tainted-env-args: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' with user controlled data. A malicious actor could leverage this to perform command injection. You may consider using 'shlex.quote()'. [confidence medium] |
sshuttle/ssh.py:124 |
| medium | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.exec-detected: Detected the use of exec(). exec() can be dangerous if used to evaluate dynamic content. If this content can be input from outside the program, this may be a code injection vulnerability. Ensure evaluated content is not definable by external sources. [confidence low] |
sshuttle/assembler.py:23 |
| medium | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.non-literal-import: Untrusted user input in importlib.import_module() function allows an attacker to load arbitrary code. Avoid dynamic values in importlib.import_module() or use a whitelist to prevent running untrusted code. [confidence low] |
sshuttle/methods/init.py:92 |
| low | opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.network.avoid-bind-to-all-interfaces: Running socket.bind to 0.0.0.0, or empty string could unexpectedly expose the server publicly as it binds to all available interfaces. Consider instead getting correct address from an environment variable or configuration file. [confidence high] |
sshuttle/stresstest.py:21 |
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: 4,039; test lines: 1,134
| Language | Lines |
|---|---|
| Python | 5,173 |