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

Scan timing: clone 2.27s · analysis 3.09s · 3.6 MB · GitHub preflight 536ms

sakisakiel711-ai/remix-of-get-this-app-88

https://github.com/sakisakiel711-ai/remix-of-get-this-app-88.git · scanned 2026-05-26 22:10 UTC (1 week, 2 days ago) · 10 languages

270 findings (54 legacy + 216 scanner) 0th percentile · Typescript · medium (20-100K LoC) Scanner says 73 (lower by 28)

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

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 1 week, 2 days ago · v2 · 162 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
Combined
71.6
/100
Repobility
71
54 legacy
9-layer
73
88.9% cov · 108 gaps
Critical
7
click to filter
Agents
6
0 votes
Crowd
0
reported
Score breakdown â 2026-05-18-v5
Component Sub-score Weight Contribution
structure_score 100.0 0.15 15.00
security_score 66.7 0.25 16.68
testing_score 0.0 0.20 0.00
documentation_score 1.0 0.15 0.15
practices_score 40.0 0.15 6.00
code_quality 71.7 0.10 7.17
Overall 1.00 45.0
Severity distribution — click a segment to filter
Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all
Severity: Critical 7 High 16 Medium 24 Low 61 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Legacy 54 9-layer 108 Crowd 0 Layer: Quality 60 Software 48 Security 13 Api 1 Frontend 38 Data 1 Cicd 1

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 49 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 Public web service has no security.txt .well-known/security.txt
  • medium Public web app has no Content Security Policy index.html
  • medium [ERR002] Empty Catch Block: Empty catch blocks hide errors. src/routes/__root.tsx:147
  • medium [ERR002] Empty Catch Block: Empty catch blocks hide errors. src/hooks/use-online-users.tsx:76
  • medium localStorage write failures are swallowed silently src/routes/interest.tsx:31
  • medium localStorage write failures are swallowed silently src/components/InstallPrompt.tsx:64
  • medium localStorage write failures are swallowed silently src/components/AnnouncementBanner.tsx:64
  • low Public web app has no humans.txt humans.txt
  • low Public web app has no sitemap sitemap.xml
  • low Public web app has no robots.txt robots.txt
  • low Duplicated implementation block across source files src/routes/top_music.tsx:49
  • low Duplicated implementation block across source files src/routes/signup.tsx:189
View all fragile runtime findings →
Commented-out code 4 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/`.
4 matching findings on this repo
  • info Commented-code block (6 lines) in vite.config.ts:1
  • info Commented-code block (5 lines) in src/components/PlayerProvider.tsx:57
  • info Commented-code block (5 lines) in src/lib/points.functions.ts:23
  • info Commented-code block (7 lines) in src/lib/topup.functions.ts:138
View all commented-out code findings →
Config drift 4 findings
What it is: Settings duplicated across env files, Docker compose, K8s, and code defaults, all with slightly different values.
Why it matters: Production behaviour depends on whichever copy your loader reads first. Subtle bugs in staging that don't reproduce in dev.
How AI causes it: AI writes new config from memory rather than reading the existing source.
Fix approach: Pick one source of truth (env vars + a settings module). Have every other place import from there. Lint for duplicates in CI.
4 matching findings on this repo
  • medium No CI/CD configuration found
  • low File has no detected symbols: vite.config.ts
  • low File has no detected symbols: eslint.config.js
  • info Commented-code block (6 lines) in vite.config.ts:1
View all config drift 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/fd1aee94-3037-47ed-8281-ef5821ab1d26/

To check status programmatically (no auth required): 

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/fd1aee94-3037-47ed-8281-ef5821ab1d26/

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.