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.
Sign up free Scan another repo

ScrapPack/Kausi

https://github.com/ScrapPack/Kausi · scanned 2026-06-16 00:05 UTC (2 months, 3 weeks ago)

49 raw signals (0 security + 49 graph)

File as issue Image
UNIFIED Repobility · multi-layer engine · AI coders

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 2 months, 3 weeks ago · v1 · 46 actionable findings from 1 signal source. 3 repeated signals grouped for readability. Security checks, system graph analysis, and verified AI-agent feedback are merged into one review queue.

JSON
Combined
63.1
/100
Security checks
63
0 findings
System graph
63
66.7% cov · 46 findings
Critical
0
click to filter
Agents
10
0 votes
Crowd
0
reported
Severity distribution — click a segment to filter
Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all
Severity: Critical 0 High 5 Medium 9 Low 11 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Security checks 0 System graph 46 Crowd 0 Layer: Software 3 Frontend 1 Security 6 Cicd 1 Quality 35
Corpus Intelligence Cross-corpus context (cohort percentile, top patterns, fix plan) is shown only on repositories you own. Sign up and connect your repo to view it.
Scan summary Repository scanned at 63.1/100 with 66.7% coverage. It contains 1069 nodes across 0 cross-layer flows, written primarily in mixed languages. Engine surfaced 49 findings — concentrated in quality (38), security (6), software (3). Risk profile is high: 0 critical, 5 high, 9 medium. Recommended next step: open the quality layer findings first — that's where the highest-impact wins live.

Showing 24 of 46 actionable findings. 49 raw detector signals were grouped into reader-sized issues. Click TP / FP to vote on a finding's accuracy — votes adjust the confidence weighting and improve detection across the platform.

high System graph security security conf 1.00 Insecure pattern 'eval_used' in harness/evals.py:290
Found a known-risky pattern (eval_used). Review and replace if possible.
harness/evals.py:290 Eval used
high System graph security security conf 1.00 Insecure pattern 'eval_used' in harness/orchestrator.py:195
Found a known-risky pattern (eval_used). Review and replace if possible.
harness/orchestrator.py:195 Eval used
high System graph security security conf 1.00 Insecure pattern 'eval_used' in validation/ratchet_efficacy.py:283
Found a known-risky pattern (eval_used). Review and replace if possible.
validation/ratchet_efficacy.py:283 Eval used
high System graph security security conf 1.00 Insecure pattern 'eval_used' in validation/README.md:281
Found a known-risky pattern (eval_used). Review and replace if possible.
validation/README.md:281 Eval used
medium System graph quality Agent instructions conf 1.00 Agent instructions exist but release-hardening basics are missing
AI-coder instruction files were found, but the repo is missing license, ci, lockfile. Treat this as a contract gap: the agent is guided, but the generated output is not yet guarded by the controls that make it repeatable.
Repo hardeningGenerated repo pattern
medium System graph quality Production readiness conf 1.00 Composite production-readiness gap
Multiple low-cost hardening controls are missing together: license, ci, lockfile. Opus verification showed these co-occurring gaps are a better readiness signal than reading each flag in isolation.
Repo hardeningGenerated repo pattern
medium System graph quality Placeholder conf 1.00 Critical user flow still appears backed by mock or placeholder data
A payment/auth/admin/order/billing-style flow contains mock, fake, TODO, dummy, or placeholder markers in runtime source. In the Fable corpus this is a high-leverage completeness smell: the app can look finished while the money, identity, or tenant flow is still scaffolded.
Mock dataCritical flowGenerated repo pattern
medium System graph security security conf 1.00 Insecure pattern 'subprocess_shell_true' in harness/artifacts.py:111
Found a known-risky pattern (subprocess_shell_true). Review and replace if possible.
harness/artifacts.py:111 Subprocess shell true
medium System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Network/subprocess call without timeout or try/except — harness/artifacts.py:111
`subprocess.run(...)` here lacks both a `timeout=` arg and an enclosing try/except. This is exactly the class of bug that took down our git-clone earlier (HTTP/2 stream cancel surfaced as a fatal). Add a `timeout=` and wrap in try/except, or use a wrapper that retries.
runtime safetyRobustness
medium System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Network/subprocess call without timeout or try/except — harness/claude_runner.py:254
`subprocess.run(...)` here lacks both a `timeout=` arg and an enclosing try/except. This is exactly the class of bug that took down our git-clone earlier (HTTP/2 stream cancel surfaced as a fatal). Add a `timeout=` and wrap in try/except, or use a wrapper that retries.
runtime safetyRobustness
medium System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Network/subprocess call without timeout or try/except — harness/closer.py:10
`subprocess.run(...)` here lacks both a `timeout=` arg and an enclosing try/except. This is exactly the class of bug that took down our git-clone earlier (HTTP/2 stream cancel surfaced as a fatal). Add a `timeout=` and wrap in try/except, or use a wrapper that retries.
runtime safetyRobustness
medium System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Network/subprocess call without timeout or try/except — harness/isolation.py:14
`subprocess.run(...)` here lacks both a `timeout=` arg and an enclosing try/except. This is exactly the class of bug that took down our git-clone earlier (HTTP/2 stream cancel surfaced as a fatal). Add a `timeout=` and wrap in try/except, or use a wrapper that retries.
runtime safetyRobustness
medium System graph cicd CI/CD security conf 1.00 No CI/CD pipelines detected
No GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, or CircleCI configs found. Without CI you can't gate deploys on tests/lints.
CI/CD securityCoverage
low System graph quality Debug conf 1.00 Debug logging residue appears in source files
Found 125 console/debugger/print-style debug statements in non-test source. This is a common fast-generation residue before production cleanup.
CleanupRepo hardeningGenerated repo pattern
low System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 4 occurrences Near-duplicate function bodies in 2 places
Functions with the same first-5-line body hash: harness/gotchas.py:load, harness/evals.py:load This is *the* AI-coder failure mode (4× more duplication in vibe-coded repos — see https://jw.hn/ai-code-hygiene). Consolidate or document why they're separate.
4 occurrences
repo-level (4 hits)
duplicatesduplication
low System graph quality License conf 1.00 No license file detected
No LICENSE/COPYING/NOTICE file was found. Generated repositories often omit licensing, which blocks reuse and automated intake.
Repo hardeningGenerated repo pattern
low System graph quality dependencies conf 1.00 Node manifest has dependencies but no lockfile: frontend/package.json
`package.json` declares dependencies, but no same-directory npm/pnpm/yarn/bun lockfile was found. Generated projects without lockfiles are less reproducible and harder to secure-scan precisely.
frontend/package.json LockfileReproducibilityGenerated repo pattern
low System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Old/deprecated-named symbol `test_source_is_git_clone_not_directory_copy` in tests/test_packaging.py:29
Names with suffixes like `_old`, `_v1`, `_deprecated` usually indicate replaced-but-not-removed code (typical AI-coder leftover). Confirm and delete, or rename if it's the active version.
old markerDead code
low System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Old/deprecated-named symbol `too_old` in harness/checkpoint.py:126
Names with suffixes like `_old`, `_v1`, `_deprecated` usually indicate replaced-but-not-removed code (typical AI-coder leftover). Confirm and delete, or rename if it's the active version.
old markerDead code
low System graph software Dead code conf 1.00 Possibly dead Python function: deco
No callers detected by AST scan in this repo. Could be exported for external callers or a framework handler.
validation/field_ab_zeroshot/acceptance_check.py:26
low System graph software Dead code conf 1.00 Possibly dead Python function: one
No callers detected by AST scan in this repo. Could be exported for external callers or a framework handler.
harness/claude_runner.py:434
low System graph software Dead code conf 1.00 Possibly dead Python function: run_unguarded
No callers detected by AST scan in this repo. Could be exported for external callers or a framework handler.
validation/ab_escape.py:373
low System graph quality Provenance conf 1.00 Shallow git history limits provenance confidence
The repository is a shallow clone. Origin/evolution analysis cannot distinguish fresh generation, imported legacy code, or long-lived human code with high confidence.
Git historyGenerated repo pattern
low System graph quality Complexity conf 1.00 Very large file: tests/test_orchestrator.py (1450 lines)
Files with >800 lines often hide complexity hotspots and discourage tests.
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/2be957a9-1bb9-4290-a87a-33cb71995a3a/

To check status programmatically (no auth required): 

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/2be957a9-1bb9-4290-a87a-33cb71995a3a/

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.