RepoTrust

Leaderboard github.com

ltebean/Live

Demonstrates how to build a live broadcast app(Swift 3)

  • View repository ↗
  • Swift
  • ★ 2,399
  • commit 1fb1680b974a
  • scored 2026-11-14
  • scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

0%

none-detected

Confidence
51%
Coverage
100%

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

Code quality

54/100

weak

Confidence
90%
Coverage
100%

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

Security

75/100

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

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

  1. 2016-072,255 · 0% AI
  2. 2016-10212 · 0% AI
  3. 2017-060 · 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
43
effective_loc
2,467
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
272.72
measured_loc
2,467
median_loc_per_hour
73.25
pr_timed_units
0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc
0
pre_ai_era_bursts
0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc
2,467
work_units
13
Release velocityskipped
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
2,087
per_kloc:assistant_voice
0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code
0
per_kloc:narrated_steps
0
per_kloc:placeholder
0

Code quality

54 weak

Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 13% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

How the score is built

  • Complexity100
  • Duplication47
  • Lint and smells100
  • Tests and CI0
  • Documentation40
  • Type safetynot measured
  • Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok
complex_functions
0
function_nloc
746
functions
119
long_functions
0
many_param_functions
0
mean_ccn
1.32
p90_ccn
2
risky_nloc_share
0.0%
Duplication (jscpd)ok6 items
compared_lines
1,285
duplicated_lines
163
duplicated_share
12.7%
files
32
Lintok
findings
0
scanned_lines
2,087
weighted_findings
0
Tests and CIok
check:ci_present
no
check:ci_runs_lint
no
check:ci_runs_tests
no
check:has_tests
no
check:test_ratio
no
check:tests_cochange
no
ci_files
0
cochange_commits
22
cochange_share
0.0%
source_lines
2,087
test_lines
0
test_ratio
0
Documentationok1 item
  • README.md README.md
check:changelog
no
check:contributing
no
check:license
no
check:readme
yes
readme_lines
118
Type safetyskipped

Security

75 adequate

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

How the score is built

  • Secrets100
  • Static analysis (SAST)81
  • 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 registriesok
checked
2
declared
2
lookup_errors
0
missing
0
recent
0
Secrets (gitleaks)ok
secrets_current
0
secrets_history
0
secrets_low_confidence
0
secrets_nonprod
0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
findings
5
findings_high
0
findings_low
0
findings_medium
5
parse_errors
10
scanned_lines
2,087
weighted_findings
1.25
Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped
CI workflows (zizmor)skipped
Security postureok1 item
  • live-server/package.json has no lockfile alongside it (unpinned dependencies) live-server/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

5 medium

SeverityRuleLocationMessageTool
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random live-ios/Live/Model.swift:42 A random number generator was detected which is **not** *guaranteed* to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the... Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random live-ios/Live/String.swift:38 A random number generator was detected which is **not** *guaranteed* to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the... Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random live-ios/Live/WaveEmitterView.swift:42 A random number generator was detected which is **not** *guaranteed* to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the... Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random live-ios/Live/WaveEmitterView.swift:43 A random number generator was detected which is **not** *guaranteed* to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the... Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random live-ios/Live/WaveEmitterView.swift:66 A random number generator was detected which is **not** *guaranteed* to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the... 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 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 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 f1d2b562b4145
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
2026-11-141fb1680b974aprov-5+qual-2+sec-20%5475
2026-11-141fb1680b974aprov-4+qual-2+sec-20%5475

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/ltebean/Live/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/ltebean/Live/)
[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/ltebean/Live/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/ltebean/Live/)
[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/ltebean/Live/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/ltebean/Live/)
Full text report
  • Repository: https://github.com/ltebean/Live
  • Commit: 1fb1680b974acf748ebde6051deec981bc2bd4f8
  • 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 51% 100%
Code quality 54 weak 90% 100%
Security 75 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
2016-07 2,255 0%
2016-10 212 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 0.00, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 13% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area Score
Complexity (lizard) 100
Duplication 47
Code smells (Opengrep) 100
Tests and CI 0
Documentation 40
Type safety n/a
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) n/a
  • Functions: 119; mean complexity 1.3, 90th percentile 2; 0 complex and 0 long functions
  • Duplicated lines: 12.7% of 1,285 compared
  • Tests: 0 test lines for 2,087 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
  • Docs missing or thin: license, contributing, changelog

Security

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

Area Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) 100
Static analysis (Opengrep) 81
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) n/a
CI workflows (zizmor) n/a
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) 0
OpenSSF Scorecard n/a
  • Posture checks passed: none; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits, lockfiles

Top findings

Severity Finding Location
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random: A random number generator was detected which is not guaranteed to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the SecCopyRandomBytes API explicitly. [confidence low] live-ios/Live/Model.swift:42
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random: A random number generator was detected which is not guaranteed to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the SecCopyRandomBytes API explicitly. [confidence low] live-ios/Live/String.swift:38
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random: A random number generator was detected which is not guaranteed to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the SecCopyRandomBytes API explicitly. [confidence low] live-ios/Live/WaveEmitterView.swift:42
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random: A random number generator was detected which is not guaranteed to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the SecCopyRandomBytes API explicitly. [confidence low] live-ios/Live/WaveEmitterView.swift:43
medium opengrep/swift.lang.crypto.insecure-random: A random number generator was detected which is not guaranteed to be Cryptographically secure. If the source of entropy is used for security purposes (e.g. with other Cryptographic operations), make sure to use the SecCopyRandomBytes API explicitly. [confidence low] live-ios/Live/WaveEmitterView.swift:66

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: 2,087; test lines: 0
Language Lines
Swift 1,246
C 778
JavaScript 63