RepoTrust

Leaderboard github.com

josephg/ShareJS

Collaborative editing in any app

  • View repository ↗
  • JavaScript
  • ★ 4,975
  • commit 414e1d6a4e0d
  • scored 2026-11-14
  • scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

0%

none-detected

Confidence
65%
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

65/100

weak

Confidence
85%
Coverage
100%

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

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 pace0
  • Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.00

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

  1. 2011-020 · 0% AI
  2. 2011-030 · 0% AI
  3. 2011-0419,032 · 0% AI
  4. 2011-051,132 · 0% AI
  5. 2011-06291 · 0% AI
  6. 2011-07127 · 0% AI
  7. 2011-0810,486 · 0% AI
  8. 2011-09806 · 0% AI
  9. 2011-10649 · 0% AI
  10. 2011-113,054 · 0% AI
  11. 2011-120 · 0% AI
  12. 2012-01693 · 0% AI
  13. 2012-0245 · 0% AI
  14. 2012-031,929 · 0% AI
  15. 2012-040 · 0% AI
  16. 2012-059 · 0% AI
  17. 2012-0625 · 0% AI
  18. 2012-07462 · 0% AI
  19. 2012-0833 · 0% AI
  20. 2012-09546 · 0% AI
  21. 2012-1049 · 0% AI
  22. 2012-11571 · 0% AI
  23. 2012-12626 · 0% AI
  24. 2013-01166 · 0% AI
  25. 2013-024,386 · 0% AI
  26. 2013-03364 · 0% AI
  27. 2013-045,248 · 0% AI
  28. 2013-052,793 · 0% AI
  29. 2013-06221 · 0% AI
  30. 2013-071,360 · 0% AI
  31. 2013-08449 · 0% AI
  32. 2013-09401 · 0% AI
  33. 2013-10865 · 0% AI
  34. 2013-1172 · 0% AI
  35. 2014-0115 · 0% AI
  36. 2014-02602 · 0% AI
  37. 2014-0362 · 0% AI
  38. 2014-0423 · 0% AI
  39. 2014-0549 · 0% AI
  40. 2014-0610 · 0% AI
  41. 2014-076,208 · 0% AI
  42. 2014-0842 · 0% AI
  43. 2014-091 · 0% AI
  44. 2014-100 · 0% AI
  45. 2014-121 · 0% AI
  46. 2015-015 · 0% AI
  47. 2015-02197 · 0% AI
  48. 2015-03293 · 0% AI
  49. 2015-046 · 0% AI
  50. 2015-05338 · 0% AI
  51. 2015-062 · 0% AI
  52. 2015-0746 · 0% AI
  53. 2015-100 · 0% AI
  54. 2016-030 · 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
1,136
effective_loc
64,790
tools_detected
0
AI tool configurationok
artifacts
0
tools_configured
0
workflow_agents
0
Commit velocityok
excluded_import_loc
29,344
flagged_loc
0
flagged_loc_share
0.0%
flagged_units
0
max_loc_per_hour
1,536.75
measured_loc
35,446
median_loc_per_hour
73.56
pr_timed_units
0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc
11,592
pre_ai_era_bursts
4
pre_ai_era_measured_loc
35,446
work_units
354
Release velocityok
flagged_releases
0
max_loc_per_day
2,721.70
releases
66
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
10,457
per_kloc:assistant_voice
0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code
0
per_kloc:narrated_steps
0
per_kloc:placeholder
0

Code quality

59 weak

Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.03, no CI test run detected; 19% of function code in complex or long functions; 2% duplicated lines. Weakest area: process.

How the score is built

  • Complexity57
  • Duplication90
  • Lint and smells100
  • Tests and CI37
  • Documentation65
  • Type safetynot measured
  • Review process5

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok10 items
complex_functions
27
function_nloc
7,253
functions
923
long_functions
3
many_param_functions
0
mean_ccn
3.35
p90_ccn
6
risky_nloc_share
18.7%
Duplication (jscpd)ok2 items
compared_lines
7,039
duplicated_lines
124
duplicated_share
1.8%
files
17
Lintok
findings
0
scanned_lines
10,457
weighted_findings
0
Tests and CIok1 item
  • CI config: .travis.yml .travis.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
171
cochange_share
0.0%
source_lines
10,457
test_lines
344
test_ratio
0.03
Documentationok2 items
  • README.md README.md
  • LICENSE LICENSE
check:changelog
no
check:contributing
no
check:license
yes
check:readme
yes
readme_lines
339
Type safetyskipped

Security

65 weak

Security posture is weak: 0 possible secret(s) in the tree, 1 only in history. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

  • Secrets82
  • Static analysis (SAST)97
  • Vulnerable dependenciesnot measured
  • CI workflowsnot measured
  • Security posture0
  • OpenSSF Scorecard25

Evidence by analyzer

OpenSSF Scorecardok9 items
aggregate
2.10
check:Binary-Artifacts
yes
check:Branch-Protection
no
check:CII-Best-Practices
no
check:Code-Review
yes
check:Fuzzing
no
check:License
yes
check:Maintained
no
check:SAST
no
check:Security-Policy
no
Package registriesok
checked
20
declared
20
lookup_errors
0
missing
0
recent
0
Secrets (gitleaks)ok
secrets_current
0
secrets_history
1
secrets_low_confidence
1
secrets_nonprod
0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
findings
4
findings_high
0
findings_low
1
findings_medium
3
parse_errors
0
scanned_lines
10,457
weighted_findings
0.81
Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped
CI workflows (zizmor)skipped
Security postureok1 item
  • package.json has no lockfile alongside it (unpinned dependencies) package.json
check:dependency_updates
no
check:lockfiles
no
check:security_policy
no
check:signed_commits
no
signed_commit_share
0.0%
unpinned_manifests
1
Release downloadsok
binary_assets
0
signals
0
suspicious
0

Findings

4 medium2 low

SeverityRuleLocationMessageTool
medium gitleaks/aws-access-token bin/options.js:49 Possible aws-access-token secret in history (commit 618e0f4f4f); removed from the current tree but still retrievable Secrets (gitleaks)
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.prototype-pollution.prototype-pollution-assignment lib/client/connection.js:398 Possibility of prototype polluting assignment detected. By adding or modifying attributes of an object prototype, it is possible to create attributes that exist on every object, or replace critical attributes with malicious ones. This... Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.prototype-pollution.prototype-pollution-assignment lib/client/connection.js:439 Possibility of prototype polluting assignment detected. By adding or modifying attributes of an object prototype, it is possible to create attributes that exist on every object, or replace critical attributes with malicious ones. This... Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.prototype-pollution.prototype-pollution-loop lib/types/json-api.js:20 Possibility of prototype polluting function detected. By adding or modifying attributes of an object prototype, it is possible to create attributes that exist on every object, or replace critical attributes with malicious ones. This can... Static analysis (opengrep)
low gitleaks/generic-api-key bin/options.js:50 Possible generic-api-key secret in history (commit 618e0f4f4f); removed from the current tree but still retrievable Secrets (gitleaks)
low opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.unsafe-formatstring lib/server/session.js:651 Detected string concatenation with a non-literal variable in a util.format / console.log function. If an attacker injects a format specifier in the string, it will forge the log message. Try to use constant values for the format string.... 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.

AnalyzerPillarStatusVersionFindingsNote
AI tool configurationAI provenanceoksignatures-v10
Explicit AI attributionAI provenanceoksignatures-v10
Release velocityAI provenanceokprov-40
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 f1d2b562b4140
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 registriesSecurityok—0
Static analysis (opengrep)Securityokopengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b4144
OpenSSF ScorecardSecurityokscorecard v5.6.00
Secrets (gitleaks)Securityokgitleaks 8.30.12

Score history

Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.

ScoredCommitScoringAI provenanceQualitySecurity
2026-11-14414e1d6a4e0dprov-5+qual-2+sec-20%5965
2026-11-14414e1d6a4e0dprov-4+qual-2+sec-20%5965

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/josephg/ShareJS/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/josephg/ShareJS/)
[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/josephg/ShareJS/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/josephg/ShareJS/)
[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/josephg/ShareJS/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/josephg/ShareJS/)
Full text report
  • Repository: https://github.com/josephg/ShareJS
  • Commit: 414e1d6a4e0d3f06a83bfe001bc81f2cd6891475
  • Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:05+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 65% 100%
Code quality 59 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
2014-06 10 0%
2014-07 6,208 0%
2014-08 42 0%
2014-09 1 0%
2014-12 1 0%
2015-01 5 0%
2015-02 197 0%
2015-03 293 0%
2015-04 6 0%
2015-05 338 0%
2015-06 2 0%
2015-07 46 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 0.03, no CI test run detected; 19% of function code in complex or long functions; 2% duplicated lines. Weakest area: process.

Area Score
Complexity (lizard) 57
Duplication 90
Code smells (Opengrep) 100
Tests and CI 37
Documentation 65
Type safety n/a
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) 5
  • Functions: 923; mean complexity 3.4, 90th percentile 6; 27 complex and 3 long functions
  • Duplicated lines: 1.8% of 7,039 compared
  • Tests: 344 test lines for 10,457 source lines (ratio 0.03); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
  • Docs missing or thin: contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is weak: 0 possible secret(s) in the tree, 1 only in history. Weakest area: posture.

Area Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) 82
Static analysis (Opengrep) 97
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) n/a
CI workflows (zizmor) n/a
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) 0
OpenSSF Scorecard 25
  • Posture checks passed: none; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits, lockfiles
  • OpenSSF Scorecard aggregate: 2.1/10 (published 2026-11-09)

Top findings

Severity Finding Location
medium gitleaks/aws-access-token: Possible aws-access-token secret in history (commit 618e0f4f4f); removed from the current tree but still retrievable bin/options.js:49
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.prototype-pollution.prototype-pollution-assignment: Possibility of prototype polluting assignment detected. By adding or modifying attributes of an object prototype, it is possible to create attributes that exist on every object, or replace critical attributes with malicious ones. This can be problematic if the software depends on existence or non-ex [confidence low] lib/client/connection.js:398
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.prototype-pollution.prototype-pollution-assignment: Possibility of prototype polluting assignment detected. By adding or modifying attributes of an object prototype, it is possible to create attributes that exist on every object, or replace critical attributes with malicious ones. This can be problematic if the software depends on existence or non-ex [confidence low] lib/client/connection.js:439
medium opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.prototype-pollution.prototype-pollution-loop: Possibility of prototype polluting function detected. By adding or modifying attributes of an object prototype, it is possible to create attributes that exist on every object, or replace critical attributes with malicious ones. This can be problematic if the software depends on existence or non-exis [confidence low] lib/types/json-api.js:20
low gitleaks/generic-api-key: Possible generic-api-key secret in history (commit 618e0f4f4f); removed from the current tree but still retrievable bin/options.js:50
low opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.unsafe-formatstring: Detected string concatenation with a non-literal variable in a util.format / console.log function. If an attacker injects a format specifier in the string, it will forge the log message. Try to use constant values for the format string. [confidence low] lib/server/session.js:651

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: 10,457; test lines: 344
Language Lines
JavaScript 10,801