Leaderboard github.com

dranger003/TurboVision

C# port of magiblot/tvision

View repository ↗
C#
★ 4
commit f8e2f6a21062
scored 2026-11-14
scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

unreviewed-ai-risk

AI provenance

100%

explicit

Confidence: 95%
Coverage: 100%

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

Code quality

59/100

weak

Confidence: 90%
Coverage: 100%

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

Security

82/100

adequate

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 files3
Work sessions at AI pace8
Releases at AI pacenot measured
Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.24

Attributed AI tools

Tool	Commits	Lines added	First seen	Last seen
Claude Code	242	40,731	2026-01-03	2026-01-09

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

2026-0140,731 · 100% AI

Findings in AI-attributed lines vs the rest

From git blame: 32,899 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	0.00	—	—
Security	0.06	—	—

Evidence by analyzer

Explicit AI attributionok26 items

attributed_commit_share: 98.8%
attributed_commits: 242
attributed_loc: 40,731
attributed_loc_share: 100.0%
commits: 245
effective_loc: 40,731
tools_detected: 1

AI tool configurationok3 items

artifacts: 3
earliest_adoption: 2026-01-03
tools_configured: 1
workflow_agents: 0

Commit velocityok8 items

excluded_import_loc: 5,502
flagged_loc: 25,594
flagged_loc_share: 72.7%
flagged_units: 8
max_loc_per_hour: 2,825.34
measured_loc: 35,229
median_loc_per_hour: 500.73
pr_timed_units: 0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc: 0
pre_ai_era_bursts: 0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc: 0
work_units: 25

Release velocityskipped

Coding styleok8 items

count:assistant_voice: 0
count:emoji_in_code: 0
count:narrated_steps: 8
count:placeholder: 0
files:assistant_voice: 0
files:emoji_in_code: 0
files:narrated_steps: 2
files:placeholder: 0
index: 0.24
lines_scanned: 32,899
per_kloc:assistant_voice: 0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code: 0
per_kloc:narrated_steps: 0.24
per_kloc:placeholder: 0

Findings in AI-written linesok

ai_lines: 32,899
blame_failures: 0
files_blamed: 166
other_lines: 0
quality:ai_findings: 0
quality:ai_per_kloc: 0
quality:other_findings: 0
security:ai_findings: 2
security:ai_per_kloc: 0.06
security:other_findings: 0

Code quality

59 weak

Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.12, no CI test run detected; 16% of function code in complex or long functions; 4% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

How the score is built

Complexity61
Duplication80
Lint and smells100
Tests and CI26
Documentation45
Type safetynot measured
Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok10 items

complex_functions: 35
function_nloc: 18,997
functions: 1,407
long_functions: 10
many_param_functions: 0
mean_ccn: 3.40
p90_ccn: 8
risky_nloc_share: 16.3%

Duplication (jscpd)ok10 items

compared_lines: 20,694
duplicated_lines: 752
duplicated_share: 3.6%
files: 166

Lintok

findings: 0
scanned_lines: 32,899
weighted_findings: 0

Tests and CIok

check:ci_present: no
check:ci_runs_lint: no
check:ci_runs_tests: no
check:has_tests: yes
check:test_ratio: no
check:tests_cochange: no
ci_files: 0
cochange_commits: 169
cochange_share: 0.6%
source_lines: 32,899
test_lines: 3,898
test_ratio: 0.12

Documentationok1 item

README.md README.md

check:changelog: no
check:contributing: no
check:license: yes
check:readme: no
readme_lines: 5

Type safetyskipped

Security

82 adequate

Security posture is adequate: no high-impact findings. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

Secrets100
Static analysis (SAST)100
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: 2
findings_high: 0
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 2
parse_errors: 0
scanned_lines: 32,899
weighted_findings: 0.50

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: 1.5%
unpinned_manifests: 0

Release downloadsok

binary_assets: 0
signals: 0
suspicious: 0

Findings

2 medium

Severity	Rule	Location	Message	Tool
medium	`opengrep/csharp.lang.security.memory.memory-marshal-create-span`	TurboVision/Core/KeyDownEvent.cs:19	MemoryMarshal.CreateSpan and MemoryMarshal.CreateReadOnlySpan should be used with caution, as the length argument is not checked. [confidence low]	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`opengrep/csharp.lang.security.memory.memory-marshal-create-span`	TurboVision/Core/KeyDownEvent.cs:27	MemoryMarshal.CreateSpan and MemoryMarshal.CreateReadOnlySpan should be used with caution, as the length argument is not checked. [confidence low]	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`	0
Tests and CI	Code quality	ok	`—`	0
Type safety	Code quality	skipped	`—`	0
CI workflows (zizmor)	Security	skipped	`—`	0
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`	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	`f8e2f6a21062`	`prov-5+qual-2+sec-2`	100%	59	82
2026-11-14	`f8e2f6a21062`	`prov-4+qual-2+sec-2`	100%	59	82

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/dranger003/TurboVision/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/dranger003/TurboVision/)

[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/dranger003/TurboVision/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/dranger003/TurboVision/)

[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/dranger003/TurboVision/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/dranger003/TurboVision/)

Full text report

Repository: https://github.com/dranger003/TurboVision
Commit: f8e2f6a21062bf0df0a060233ea4cff1471d26c1
Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:04+00:00
Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2

Scores

Unreviewed AI code risk: a large share of this code is explicitly AI-attributed, and its tests or review process are weak while quality or security scores are low.

Pillar	Score	Signal	Confidence	Coverage
AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share)	100	explicit	95%	100%
Code quality	59	weak	90%	100%
Security	82	adequate	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
Claude Code	242	40,731

AI tooling configured in repo: claude-code

Current source lines last changed by AI-attributed commits: 32,899 of 32,899.

Too few lines in one group to compare finding densities.

Stylometry index: 0.24 per 1,000 lines (narrated steps 8, placeholders 0, assistant phrasing 0, emoji 0). Reported as a signal, not scored.

Month	Lines added	Attributed to AI
2026-01	40,731	100%

Evidence

Claude Code: author Claude (f8e2f6a21062)
Claude Code: author Claude (50c850e1d9ca)
Claude Code: author Claude (9fd94765e4a2)
Claude Code: author Claude (aa8252c6bc98)
Claude Code: author Claude (a160b0e6e4e9)
Claude Code: author Claude (b60569649245)
Claude Code: author Claude (34aabfe59ee4)
Claude Code: author Claude (491dc8f27c94)
Claude Code: author Claude (f02445beac05)
Claude Code: author Claude (07e457ebc031)
Claude Code: author Claude (dd9fe31f0015)
Claude Code: author Claude (8ca428f199a5)
Claude Code: author Claude (ece577694b65)
Claude Code: author Claude (ad3859377718)
Claude Code: author Claude (d41e22cee6ce)

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 0.12, no CI test run detected; 16% of function code in complex or long functions; 4% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area	Score
Complexity (lizard)	61
Duplication	80
Code smells (Opengrep)	100
Tests and CI	26
Documentation	45
Type safety	n/a
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance)	n/a

Functions: 1,407; mean complexity 3.4, 90th percentile 8; 35 complex and 10 long functions
Duplicated lines: 3.6% of 20,694 compared
Tests: 3,898 test lines for 32,899 source lines (ratio 0.12); CI test commands: none detected; 1% of recent source commits also change tests
Docs missing or thin: readme, contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is adequate: no high-impact findings. Weakest area: posture.

Area	Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history)	100
Static analysis (Opengrep)	100
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
medium	`opengrep/csharp.lang.security.memory.memory-marshal-create-span`: MemoryMarshal.CreateSpan and MemoryMarshal.CreateReadOnlySpan should be used with caution, as the length argument is not checked. [confidence low]	TurboVision/Core/KeyDownEvent.cs:19
medium	`opengrep/csharp.lang.security.memory.memory-marshal-create-span`: MemoryMarshal.CreateSpan and MemoryMarshal.CreateReadOnlySpan should be used with caution, as the length argument is not checked. [confidence low]	TurboVision/Core/KeyDownEvent.cs:27

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: 32,899; test lines: 3,898

Language	Lines
C#	36,797