RepoTrust

Leaderboard github.com

villepekkaa/monkey-pygame

Simple Python game using a pygame module

  • View repository ↗
  • Python
  • ★ 0
  • commit ee6d171558df
  • scored 2026-11-14
  • scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

0%

none-detected

Confidence
49%
Coverage
100%

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

Code quality

38/100

poor

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.

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. 2025-01240 · 0% AI
  2. 2025-020 · 0% AI
  3. 2025-040 · 0% AI
  4. 2026-06256 · 0% AI
  5. 2026-070 · 0% AI
  6. 2026-080 · 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
36
effective_loc
496
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
64
measured_loc
496
median_loc_per_hour
60.76
pr_timed_units
0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc
0
pre_ai_era_bursts
0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc
0
work_units
2
Release velocityok
flagged_releases
0
max_loc_per_day
0.50
releases
6
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
257
per_kloc:assistant_voice
0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code
0
per_kloc:narrated_steps
0
per_kloc:placeholder
0

Code quality

38 poor

Code quality is poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 53% of function code in complex or long functions; 6% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

How the score is built

  • Complexity21
  • Duplication71
  • Lint and smells61
  • Tests and CI15
  • Documentation45
  • Type safety40
  • Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok1 item
complex_functions
1
function_nloc
158
functions
5
long_functions
0
many_param_functions
0
mean_ccn
9.40
p90_ccn
25
risky_nloc_share
52.5%
Duplication (jscpd)ok1 item
compared_lines
207
duplicated_lines
12
duplicated_share
5.8%
files
1
Lintok
category:best-practice
2
findings
2
scanned_lines
257
weighted_findings
2
Tests and CIok2 items
  • CI config: .github/workflows/build-and-release.yml .github/workflows/build-and-release.yml
  • CI config: .github/workflows/codeql.yml .github/workflows/codeql.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
2
cochange_commits
5
cochange_share
0.0%
source_lines
257
test_lines
0
test_ratio
0
Documentationok2 items
  • README.md README.md
  • LICENSE.txt LICENSE.txt
check:changelog
no
check:contributing
no
check:license
yes
check:readme
no
readme_lines
10
Type safetyok
check:low_escape_density
yes
check:strict_config
no
escapes
0
escapes_per_kloc
0

Security

75 adequate

Security posture is adequate: 1 high-severity SAST findings; 2 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

  • Secrets100
  • Static analysis (SAST)53
  • Vulnerable dependencies100
  • CI workflows64
  • Security posture20
  • 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
1
findings_high
1
findings_low
0
findings_medium
0
parse_errors
0
scanned_lines
257
weighted_findings
1.80
Dependencies (osv-scanner)ok
penalty
0
vulnerabilities
0
vulnerable_packages
0
vulns_critical
0
vulns_high
0
vulns_low
0
vulns_medium
0
vulns_unknown
0
CI workflows (zizmor)ok
findings
5
findings_high
2
findings_low
1
findings_medium
2
penalty
26.40
workflows
2
Security postureok
check:dependency_updates
no
check:lockfiles
yes
check:security_policy
no
check:signed_commits
yes
signed_commit_share
55.6%
unpinned_manifests
0
Release downloadsok2 items
binary_assets
2
signals
1
suspicious
0

Findings

3 high4 medium1 info

SeverityRuleLocationMessageTool
high zizmor/unpinned-uses .github/workflows/codeql.yml:25 unpinned action reference [confidence high] CI workflows (zizmor)
high zizmor/unpinned-uses .github/workflows/codeql.yml:31 unpinned action reference [confidence high] CI workflows (zizmor)
high opengrep/dockerfile.security.missing-user Dockerfile:12 By not specifying a USER, a program in the container may run as 'root'. This is a security hazard. If an attacker can control a process running as root, they may have control over the container. Ensure that the last USER in a Dockerfile... Static analysis (opengrep)
medium opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding main.py:225 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
medium opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding main.py:36 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
medium zizmor/artipacked .github/workflows/build-and-release.yml:16 credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] CI workflows (zizmor)
medium zizmor/artipacked .github/workflows/codeql.yml:21 credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] CI workflows (zizmor)
info zizmor/superfluous-actions .github/workflows/build-and-release.yml:35 action functionality is already included by the runner [confidence high] CI workflows (zizmor)

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 f1d2b562b4142
Tests and CICode qualityok—0
Type safetyCode qualityok—0
CI workflows (zizmor)Securityokzizmor 1.32.05
Dependencies (osv-scanner)Securityokosv-scanner version: 2.7.10
Release downloadsSecurityok—0
Security postureSecurityok—0
Package registriesSecurityok—0
Static analysis (opengrep)Securityokopengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b4141
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
2026-11-14ee6d171558dfprov-5+qual-2+sec-20%3875
2026-11-14ee6d171558dfprov-4+qual-2+sec-20%3875

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/villepekkaa/monkey-pygame/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/villepekkaa/monkey-pygame/)
[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/villepekkaa/monkey-pygame/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/villepekkaa/monkey-pygame/)
[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/villepekkaa/monkey-pygame/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/villepekkaa/monkey-pygame/)
Full text report

Scores

Pillar Score Signal Confidence Coverage
AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) 0 none-detected 49% 100%
Code quality 38 poor 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
2025-01 240 0%
2026-06 256 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 poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 53% of function code in complex or long functions; 6% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area Score
Complexity (lizard) 21
Duplication 71
Code smells (Opengrep) 61
Tests and CI 15
Documentation 45
Type safety 40
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) n/a
  • Functions: 5; mean complexity 9.4, 90th percentile 25; 1 complex and 0 long functions
  • Duplicated lines: 5.8% of 207 compared
  • Tests: 0 test lines for 257 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
  • Docs missing or thin: readme, contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is adequate: 1 high-severity SAST findings; 2 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.

Area Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) 100
Static analysis (Opengrep) 53
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) 100
CI workflows (zizmor) 64
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) 20
OpenSSF Scorecard n/a
  • Posture checks passed: signed commits, lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates

Top findings

Severity Finding Location
high opengrep/dockerfile.security.missing-user: By not specifying a USER, a program in the container may run as 'root'. This is a security hazard. If an attacker can control a process running as root, they may have control over the container. Ensure that the last USER in a Dockerfile is a USER other than 'root'. [confidence medium] Dockerfile:12
high zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] .github/workflows/codeql.yml:25
high zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] .github/workflows/codeql.yml:31
medium zizmor/artipacked: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] .github/workflows/build-and-release.yml:16
medium zizmor/artipacked: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] .github/workflows/codeql.yml:21
info zizmor/superfluous-actions: action functionality is already included by the runner [confidence high] .github/workflows/build-and-release.yml:35

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

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: 257; test lines: 0
Language Lines
Python 257