RepoTrust

Leaderboard github.com

brojangles24/ControlD_Updater

  • View repository ↗
  • Python
  • ★ 0
  • commit a70f2620cd8a
  • scored 2026-11-14
  • scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

0%

possible

Confidence
65%
Coverage
100%

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

Code quality

40/100

poor

Confidence
90%
Coverage
100%

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

Security

81/100

adequate

Confidence
85%
Coverage
100%

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

AI provenance

0% possible

Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development. Comments and strings use phrasing typical of LLM-written code (see the coding style evidence).

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)11.00

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

  1. 2025-121,051 · 0% AI
  2. 2026-01612 · 0% AI
  3. 2026-020 · 0% AI
  4. 2026-03140 · 0% AI
  5. 2026-044 · 0% AI
  6. 2026-05604 · 0% AI
  7. 2026-06114 · 0% AI
  8. 2026-0746 · 0% AI
  9. 2026-082 · 0% AI
  10. 2026-090 · 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
215
effective_loc
2,573
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
168.79
measured_loc
2,573
median_loc_per_hour
125.97
pr_timed_units
0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc
0
pre_ai_era_bursts
0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc
0
work_units
19
Release velocityskipped
Coding styleok
count:assistant_voice
0
count:emoji_in_code
22
count:narrated_steps
0
count:placeholder
0
files:assistant_voice
0
files:emoji_in_code
1
files:narrated_steps
0
files:placeholder
0
index
11
lines_scanned
426
per_kloc:assistant_voice
0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code
22
per_kloc:narrated_steps
0
per_kloc:placeholder
0

Code quality

40 poor

Code quality is poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 47% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

How the score is built

  • Complexity24
  • Duplication100
  • Lint and smells37
  • Tests and CI15
  • Documentation45
  • Type safety40
  • Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok1 item
complex_functions
1
function_nloc
299
functions
12
long_functions
1
many_param_functions
1
mean_ccn
7.42
p90_ccn
15
risky_nloc_share
46.8%
Duplication (jscpd)ok
compared_lines
334
duplicated_lines
0
duplicated_share
0.0%
files
1
Lintok
category:best-practice
2
category:correctness
2
findings
4
scanned_lines
426
weighted_findings
4
Tests and CIok1 item
  • CI config: .github/workflows/sync.yml .github/workflows/sync.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
64
cochange_share
0.0%
source_lines
426
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
no
readme_lines
4
Type safetyok
check:low_escape_density
yes
check:strict_config
no
escapes
2
escapes_per_kloc
2

Security

81 adequate

Security posture is adequate: 2 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

  • Secrets100
  • Static analysis (SAST)100
  • Vulnerable dependenciesnot measured
  • CI workflows66
  • Security posture20
  • 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
0
findings_high
0
findings_low
0
findings_medium
0
parse_errors
0
scanned_lines
426
weighted_findings
0
Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped
CI workflows (zizmor)ok
findings
3
findings_high
2
findings_low
0
findings_medium
1
penalty
25.20
workflows
1
Security postureok
check:dependency_updates
no
check:lockfiles
yes
check:security_policy
no
check:signed_commits
yes
signed_commit_share
67.5%
unpinned_manifests
0
Release downloadsok
binary_assets
0
signals
0
suspicious
0

Findings

2 high5 medium

SeverityRuleLocationMessageTool
high zizmor/unpinned-uses .github/workflows/sync.yml:19 unpinned action reference [confidence high] CI workflows (zizmor)
high zizmor/unpinned-uses .github/workflows/sync.yml:22 unpinned action reference [confidence high] CI workflows (zizmor)
medium opengrep/python.correctness.suppressed-exception-handling-finally-break main.py:200 Having a `break`, `continue`, or `return` in a `finally` block will cause strange behaviors, like exceptions not being caught. Lint
medium opengrep/python.lang.correctness.use-sys-exit main.py:30 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 opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding main.py:48 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 main.py:57 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/sync.yml:18 credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] CI workflows (zizmor)

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 qualityok—0
CI workflows (zizmor)Securityokzizmor 1.32.03
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 f1d2b562b4140
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
2026-11-14a70f2620cd8aprov-5+qual-2+sec-20%4081
2026-11-14a70f2620cd8aprov-4+qual-2+sec-20%4081

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/brojangles24/ControlD_Updater/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/brojangles24/ControlD_Updater/)
[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/brojangles24/ControlD_Updater/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/brojangles24/ControlD_Updater/)
[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/brojangles24/ControlD_Updater/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/brojangles24/ControlD_Updater/)
Full text report

Scores

Pillar Score Signal Confidence Coverage
AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) 0 possible 65% 100%
Code quality 40 poor 90% 100%
Security 81 adequate 85% 100%

AI provenance

Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development. Comments and strings use phrasing typical of LLM-written code (see the coding style evidence).

  • Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%

  • Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%

  • Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%

  • Stylometry index: 11.00 per 1,000 lines (narrated steps 0, placeholders 0, assistant phrasing 0, emoji 22). Reported as a signal, not scored.

Month Lines added Attributed to AI
2025-12 1,051 0%
2026-01 612 0%
2026-03 140 0%
2026-04 4 0%
2026-05 604 0%
2026-06 114 0%
2026-07 46 0%
2026-08 2 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 poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 47% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area Score
Complexity (lizard) 24
Duplication 100
Code smells (Opengrep) 37
Tests and CI 15
Documentation 45
Type safety 40
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) n/a
  • Functions: 12; mean complexity 7.4, 90th percentile 15; 1 complex and 1 long functions
  • Duplicated lines: 0.0% of 334 compared
  • Tests: 0 test lines for 426 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
  • Docs missing or thin: readme, contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is adequate: 2 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

Area Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) 100
Static analysis (Opengrep) 100
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) n/a
CI workflows (zizmor) 66
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) 20
OpenSSF Scorecard n/a
  • Posture checks passed: signed commits, lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates

Top findings

Severity Finding Location
high zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] .github/workflows/sync.yml:19
high zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] .github/workflows/sync.yml:22
medium zizmor/artipacked: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] .github/workflows/sync.yml:18

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: 426; test lines: 0
Language Lines
Python 426