Leaderboard github.com

loopeer/code-reader

One Multi program language code reader

View repository ↗
Kotlin
★ 932
commit 075007d1827b
scored 2026-11-14
scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

none-detected

Confidence: 65%
Coverage: 100%

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

Code quality

55/100

weak

Confidence: 90%
Coverage: 100%

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

Security

80/100

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

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)0.06

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

2016-0822,151 · 0% AI
2016-091,574 · 0% AI
2016-1114 · 0% AI
2017-041 · 0% AI
2017-0844,215 · 0% AI
2017-090 · 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: 401
effective_loc: 67,955
tools_detected: 0

AI tool configurationok

artifacts: 0
tools_configured: 0
workflow_agents: 0

Commit velocityok

excluded_import_loc: 6,083
flagged_loc: 0
flagged_loc_share: 0.0%
flagged_units: 0
max_loc_per_hour: 2,933
measured_loc: 61,872
median_loc_per_hour: 109.50
pr_timed_units: 0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc: 35,973
pre_ai_era_bursts: 8
pre_ai_era_measured_loc: 61,872
work_units: 161

Release velocityok

flagged_releases: 0
max_loc_per_day: 432
releases: 8

Coding styleok1 item

step-by-step narration comment: // First, look for nested blocks, e.g.:

count:assistant_voice: 0
count:emoji_in_code: 0
count:narrated_steps: 1
count:placeholder: 0
files:assistant_voice: 0
files:emoji_in_code: 0
files:narrated_steps: 1
files:placeholder: 0
index: 0.06
lines_scanned: 17,810
per_kloc:assistant_voice: 0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code: 0
per_kloc:narrated_steps: 0.06
per_kloc:placeholder: 0

Code quality

55 weak

Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 7% of function code in complex or long functions; 9% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

How the score is built

Complexity81
Duplication60
Lint and smells84
Tests and CI21
Documentation40
Type safetynot measured
Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok7 items

complex_functions: 6
function_nloc: 9,172
functions: 967
long_functions: 3
many_param_functions: 1
mean_ccn: 2.23
p90_ccn: 4
risky_nloc_share: 7.0%

Duplication (jscpd)ok10 items

compared_lines: 11,263
duplicated_lines: 975
duplicated_share: 8.7%
files: 140

Lintok

category:correctness: 4
findings: 4
scanned_lines: 17,810
weighted_findings: 12

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: 245
cochange_share: 1.2%
source_lines: 17,810
test_lines: 43
test_ratio: 0.00

Documentationok1 item

README.md README.md

check:changelog: no
check:contributing: no
check:license: no
check:readme: yes
readme_lines: 46

Type safetyskipped

Security

80 adequate

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

How the score is built

Secrets100
Static analysis (SAST)96
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: 6
findings_high: 0
findings_low: 0
findings_medium: 6
parse_errors: 0
scanned_lines: 17,810
weighted_findings: 2.20

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: 0.0%
unpinned_manifests: 0

Release downloadsok5 items

binary_assets: 9
signals: 1
suspicious: 0

Findings

4 high6 medium

Severity	Rule	Location	Message	Tool
high	`opengrep/java.lang.correctness.hardcoded-conditional`	libraries/itemtouchhelperextension/src/main/java/com/loopeer/itemtouchhelperextension/ItemTouchHelperExtension.java:2367	This if statement will always have the same behavior and is therefore unnecessary.	Lint
high	`opengrep/java.lang.correctness.hardcoded-conditional`	libraries/itemtouchhelperextension/src/main/java/com/loopeer/itemtouchhelperextension/ItemTouchHelperExtension.java:274	This if statement will always have the same behavior and is therefore unnecessary.	Lint
high	`opengrep/java.lang.correctness.hardcoded-conditional`	libraries/itemtouchhelperextension/src/main/java/com/loopeer/itemtouchhelperextension/ItemTouchHelperExtension.java:311	This if statement will always have the same behavior and is therefore unnecessary.	Lint
high	`opengrep/java.lang.correctness.hardcoded-conditional`	libraries/itemtouchhelperextension/src/main/java/com/loopeer/itemtouchhelperextension/ItemTouchHelperExtension.java:327	This if statement will always have the same behavior and is therefore unnecessary.	Lint
medium	`opengrep/java.android.security.exported_activity`	code-reader-kt/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml:22	The application exports an activity. Any application on the device can launch the exported activity which may compromise the integrity of your application or its data. Ensure that any exported activities do not have privileged access...	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`opengrep/java.android.security.exported_activity`	code-reader-kt/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml:82	The application exports an activity. Any application on the device can launch the exported activity which may compromise the integrity of your application or its data. Ensure that any exported activities do not have privileged access...	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`opengrep/javascript.browser.security.eval-detected`	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shCore.js:17	Detected the use of eval(). eval() 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...	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp`	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shCore.js:17	RegExp() called with a `c` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use...	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`opengrep/javascript.browser.security.eval-detected`	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shLegacy.js:17	Detected the use of eval(). eval() 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...	Static analysis (opengrep)
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp`	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shLegacy.js:17	RegExp() called with a `c` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use...	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	ok	`prov-4`	0
Coding style	AI provenance	ok	`—`	0
Commit velocity	AI provenance	ok	`prov-4`	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`	4
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`	6
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	`075007d1827b`	`prov-5+qual-2+sec-2`	0%	55	80
2026-11-14	`075007d1827b`	`prov-4+qual-2+sec-2`	0%	55	80

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/loopeer/code-reader/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/loopeer/code-reader/)

[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/loopeer/code-reader/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/loopeer/code-reader/)

[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/loopeer/code-reader/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/loopeer/code-reader/)

Full text report

Repository: https://github.com/loopeer/code-reader
Commit: 075007d1827b39280111dbe767a1d64484f816f6
Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:06+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	55	weak	90%	100%
Security	80	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: 0.06 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
2016-08	22,151	0%
2016-09	1,574	0%
2016-11	14	0%
2017-04	1	0%
2017-08	44,215	0%

Evidence

step-by-step narration comment: // First, look for nested blocks, e.g.: (libraries/ma)

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 0.00, no CI test run detected; 7% of function code in complex or long functions; 9% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area	Score
Complexity (lizard)	81
Duplication	60
Code smells (Opengrep)	84
Tests and CI	21
Documentation	40
Type safety	n/a
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance)	n/a

Functions: 967; mean complexity 2.2, 90th percentile 4; 6 complex and 3 long functions
Duplicated lines: 8.7% of 11,263 compared
Tests: 43 test lines for 17,810 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 1% of recent source commits also change tests
Docs missing or thin: license, 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)	96
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/java.android.security.exported_activity`: The application exports an activity. Any application on the device can launch the exported activity which may compromise the integrity of your application or its data. Ensure that any exported activities do not have privileged access to your application's control plane. [confidence medium]	code-reader-kt/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml:22
medium	`opengrep/java.android.security.exported_activity`: The application exports an activity. Any application on the device can launch the exported activity which may compromise the integrity of your application or its data. Ensure that any exported activities do not have privileged access to your application's control plane. [confidence medium]	code-reader-kt/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml:82
medium	`opengrep/javascript.browser.security.eval-detected`: Detected the use of eval(). eval() 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]	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shCore.js:17
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp`: RegExp() called with a `c` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use hardcoded regexes instead. If your regex is run on user-controlled in [confidence low]	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shCore.js:17
medium	`opengrep/javascript.browser.security.eval-detected`: Detected the use of eval(). eval() 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]	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shLegacy.js:17
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-regexp`: RegExp() called with a `c` function argument, this might allow an attacker to cause a Regular Expression Denial-of-Service (ReDoS) within your application as RegExP blocks the main thread. For this reason, it is recommended to use hardcoded regexes instead. If your regex is run on user-controlled in [confidence low]	code-reader-kt/src/main/assets/scripts/shLegacy.js:17

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

binary-release-asset: release v1.1.0 ships app-fir-release.apk (8426 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release V1.0.2-9 ships app-fir-release.apk (1271 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release V1.0.2-8 ships app-fir-release.apk (109 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release V1.0.2-7 ships app-fir-release.apk (45 downloads)
binary-release-asset: release V1.0.2-6 ships app-fir-release.apk (33 downloads)

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: 17,810; test lines: 43

Language	Lines
Kotlin	10,536
Java	5,277
JavaScript	2,040