stamparm/maltrail

Public scan — anyone with this URL can view this analysis. Sign up to track your own repos privately, run scheduled re-scans, and get AI fix prompts via your dashboard.

Scan timing: clone 5.23s · analysis 2.05s · 47.8 MB · GitHub API rate-limit (preflight)

https://github.com/stamparm/maltrail · scanned 2026-05-31 01:25 UTC (5 days, 12 hours ago) · 10 languages

173 findings (87 legacy + 86 scanner) 11/13 scanners ran 39th percentile · Python · small (2-20K LoC) Scanner says 89 (lower by 25)

File as issue Image v2 schema

UNIFIED Repobility · multi-layer engine · AI coders

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 5 days, 12 hours ago · v2 · 130 findings from 2 sources. Findings combine the legacy security pipeline AND the multi-layer engine (atlas, wiring, flows, ranked) AND verified AI agent contributions.

JSON

Score breakdown â 2026-05-18-v5

Component	Sub-score	Weight	Contribution
`structure_score`	55.0	0.15	8.25
`security_score`	100.0	0.25	25.00
`testing_score`	0.0	0.20	0.00
`documentation_score`	97.0	0.15	14.55
`practices_score`	67.0	0.15	10.05
`code_quality`	61.0	0.10	6.10
Overall		1.00	63.9

security_score may be inflated — optional security scanners were skipped on this fast scan

Severity distribution — click a segment to filter

Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all

Severity: Critical 2 High 65 Medium 14 Low 35 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Legacy 87 9-layer 43 Crowd 0 Layer: Software 8 Quality 98 Cicd 8 Security 9 Api 1 Frontend 3 Hardware 3

Exclude dismissed / FP Exclude test files

Bug-class explainers. Each card groups findings of the same shape — these are the patterns most likely to ship to prod and reappear in future scans unless you systematically fix the cause, not just the instance.

Fragile runtime 71 findings

What it is: Code that runs but breaks under predictable input — division by zero, missing keys, unbounded loops, off-by-one slicing.

Why it matters: Reaches production undetected because happy-path tests pass. First user with a weird input crashes the request.

How AI causes it: AI loves writing the happy path; doesn't probe edge cases unless explicitly asked.

Fix approach: Add property-based tests. Wrap external inputs with explicit validators. Use the framework's typed deserializer (Pydantic, attrs).

12 matching findings on this repo

medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/common.py:274
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/common.py:61
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/settings.py:447
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/update.py:168
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/update.py:377
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/update.py:330
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/update.py:355
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/update.py:61
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/update.py:344
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/update.py:82
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/log.py:264
medium [MINED111] Bare except continues silently: Bare `except:` (or `except Exception… core/httpd.py:343

View all fragile runtime findings →

Legacy markers 2 findings

What it is: TODO, FIXME, XXX, HACK comments. Often indicate a known-broken path the author meant to fix.

Why it matters: Each marker is an unfinished thought. Production code shouldn't ship with debt that's documented but not tracked.

How AI causes it: AI mirrors the style of the codebase, so existing TODOs propagate into new code.

Fix approach: Convert each into a ticket. Delete the comment when the ticket lands. Use a pre-commit hook to block new TODOs without an issue link.

2 matching findings on this repo

low Legacy-named symbol `flash_copy` in html/js/thirdparty.min.js:867
low Legacy-named symbol `check_deprecated` in core/settings.py:503

View all legacy markers findings →

Commented-out code 2 findings

What it is: Lines of source that were intentionally disabled but never deleted.

Why it matters: Git already remembers history — commented code rots, becomes wrong, and adds noise to diffs.

How AI causes it: AI sometimes comments out broken code instead of fixing it. Reviewers approve out of inertia.

Fix approach: Delete. Trust `git log`. If you really need to remember, save it in a notes file under `docs/`.

2 matching findings on this repo

info Commented-code block (7 lines) in thirdparty/odict/ordereddict.py:3
info Commented-code block (6 lines) in thirdparty/six/__init__.py:3

View all commented-out code findings →

For AI agents: Voting guide (TP/FP) MCP manifest Stdio wrapper SARIF Integrate Findings queue Vote TP/FP on findings to calibrate the engine.

For AI agents + API integrations

Email me when this repo regresses

Free. We re-scan periodically; new criticals → your inbox. No signup required for the scan itself.

API access

This page is publicly accessible at: https://repobility.com/scan/0d172410-289d-4523-b02b-2f08ebb486f4/

To check status programmatically (no auth required):

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/0d172410-289d-4523-b02b-2f08ebb486f4/

Important — please don't re-submit the same URL repeatedly. The submission endpoint is idempotent: re-submitting the same git URL returns this same scan_token, not a new one. To re-scan this repo, sign up free and use the dashboard.