RepoTrust

Leaderboard github.com

loregr/LGButton

A fully customisable subclass of the native UIControl which allows you to create beautiful buttons without writing any line of code.

  • View repository ↗
  • Swift
  • ★ 2,279
  • commit b58540eff6b1
  • scored 2026-11-14
  • scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

0%

none-detected

Confidence
56%
Coverage
100%

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

Code quality

70/100

adequate

Confidence
90%
Coverage
100%

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

Security

79/100

adequate

Confidence
85%
Coverage
100%

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

Dispute or request a re-score Full report JSON RepoTrust ai badgeRepoTrust quality badgeRepoTrust security badge

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. 2017-064,296 · 0% AI
  2. 2017-0750 · 0% AI
  3. 2017-080 · 0% AI
  4. 2017-09100 · 0% AI
  5. 2017-103 · 0% AI
  6. 2017-116 · 0% AI
  7. 2017-120 · 0% AI
  8. 2018-095 · 0% AI
  9. 2018-123,696 · 0% AI
  10. 2019-011,553 · 0% AI
  11. 2019-0212 · 0% AI
  12. 2019-0314 · 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
63
effective_loc
9,735
tools_detected
0
AI tool configurationok
artifacts
0
tools_configured
0
workflow_agents
0
Commit velocityok
excluded_import_loc
4,296
flagged_loc
0
flagged_loc_share
0.0%
flagged_units
0
max_loc_per_hour
862.75
measured_loc
5,439
median_loc_per_hour
385.75
pr_timed_units
0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc
3,451
pre_ai_era_bursts
1
pre_ai_era_measured_loc
5,439
work_units
23
Release velocityok
flagged_releases
0
max_loc_per_day
1,375.40
releases
12
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
5,480
per_kloc:assistant_voice
0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code
0
per_kloc:narrated_steps
0
per_kloc:placeholder
0

Code quality

70 adequate

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

How the score is built

  • Complexity100
  • Duplication100
  • Lint and smells96
  • Tests and CI15
  • Documentation80
  • Type safety40
  • Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok
complex_functions
0
function_nloc
715
functions
109
long_functions
0
many_param_functions
0
mean_ccn
1.83
p90_ccn
4
risky_nloc_share
0.0%
Duplication (jscpd)ok
compared_lines
4,951
duplicated_lines
0
duplicated_share
0.0%
files
19
Lintok
category:best-practice
1
findings
1
scanned_lines
5,480
weighted_findings
1
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
no
check:test_ratio
no
check:tests_cochange
no
ci_files
1
cochange_commits
30
cochange_share
0.0%
source_lines
5,480
test_lines
0
test_ratio
0
Documentationok3 items
  • README.md README.md
  • LICENSE.md LICENSE.md
  • CONTRIBUTING.md CONTRIBUTING.md
check:changelog
no
check:contributing
yes
check:license
yes
check:readme
yes
readme_lines
128
Type safetyok
check:low_escape_density
yes
check:strict_config
no
escapes
0
escapes_per_kloc
0

Security

79 adequate

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

How the score is built

  • Secrets94
  • 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
2
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
findings
0
findings_high
0
findings_low
0
findings_medium
0
parse_errors
6
scanned_lines
5,480
weighted_findings
0
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
9.5%
unpinned_manifests
0
Release downloadsok
binary_assets
0
signals
0
suspicious
0

Findings

1 medium2 low

SeverityRuleLocationMessageTool
medium opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding LGButton/Classes/SwiftIconFont/GenSwiftEnum.py:32 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
low gitleaks/generic-api-key Example/LGButton.xcworkspace/xcshareddata/LGButton.xcscmblueprint:2 Possible generic-api-key secret in history (commit b3e171e93a); removed from the current tree but still retrievable Secrets (gitleaks)
low gitleaks/square-access-token Example/Pods/Pods.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj:20 Possible square-access-token secret in the current tree (test/docs/example file) Secrets (gitleaks)

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 f1d2b562b4141
Tests and CICode qualityok—0
Type safetyCode qualityok—0
CI workflows (zizmor)Securityskipped—0
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 8.30.12

Score history

Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.

ScoredCommitScoringAI provenanceQualitySecurity
2026-11-14b58540eff6b1prov-5+qual-2+sec-20%7079
2026-11-14b58540eff6b1prov-4+qual-2+sec-20%7079

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/loregr/LGButton/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/loregr/LGButton/)
[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/loregr/LGButton/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/loregr/LGButton/)
[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/loregr/LGButton/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/loregr/LGButton/)
Full text report
  • Repository: https://github.com/loregr/LGButton
  • Commit: b58540eff6b1ca74aeffdff71cd5eb060a219469
  • 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 56% 100%
Code quality 70 adequate 90% 100%
Security 79 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%
Month Lines added Attributed to AI
2017-06 4,296 0%
2017-07 50 0%
2017-09 100 0%
2017-10 3 0%
2017-11 6 0%
2018-09 5 0%
2018-12 3,696 0%
2019-01 1,553 0%
2019-02 12 0%
2019-03 14 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 adequate: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 0% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area Score
Complexity (lizard) 100
Duplication 100
Code smells (Opengrep) 96
Tests and CI 15
Documentation 80
Type safety 40
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) n/a
  • Functions: 109; mean complexity 1.8, 90th percentile 4; 0 complex and 0 long functions
  • Duplicated lines: 0.0% of 4,951 compared
  • Tests: 0 test lines for 5,480 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
  • Docs missing or thin: changelog

Security

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

Area Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) 94
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
low gitleaks/square-access-token: Possible square-access-token secret in the current tree (test/docs/example file) Example/Pods/Pods.xcodeproj/project.pbxproj:20
low gitleaks/generic-api-key: Possible generic-api-key secret in history (commit b3e171e93a); removed from the current tree but still retrievable Example/LGButton.xcworkspace/xcshareddata/LGButton.xcscmblueprint:2

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: 5,480; test lines: 0
Language Lines
Swift 4,583
Python 863
C 34