BEagle1984/silverback

Executive summary

BEagle1984/silverback scores 63 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while five of its seven lenses score higher still: Event-Driven at 100, rated Exemplary, Security and Compliance and Performance at 79 and Architecture at 70, all rated Strong, and Production Readiness at 67, rated Adequate.

The score is lower than those five because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Maturity, which scores 56 and is rated Adequate. Its Documentation accuracy dimension scores 2 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality and to resolve the 1 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality, and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 63 to about 67.

181 findings are critical: 168 in Explicit Debt, five in IaC & Container Security, two in Captive dependencies, two in Secret Scanning, two in Secrets (history), one in Project dependency cycles and one in Static Analysis (SAST).

Watchdog couldn't measure Dependency Hygiene, Schema migrations and Runtime accessibility in this code, so those dimensions are left out of the score. The product code is 66,910 lines, which would take an estimated 1.9 person-years, around €280,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 63 Adequate, capped by Explicit Debt Architecture 70 Strong Maturity 56 Adequate, capped by Documentation accuracy Production Readiness 67 Adequate Security and Compliance 79 Strong Event-Driven 100 ★ Exemplary Performance 79 Strong

A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.

Maturity 56 · counts for 46%Code Health 63 · counts for 25%Production Readiness 67 · counts for 14%Architecture 70 · counts for 8%Security and Compliance 79 · counts for 4%Performance 79 · counts for 2%Event-Driven 100 · counts for 1%

If Maturity rose from 56 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 63 to about 67.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Business logic 8%Supporting code 24%Tests 68%

New since the last survey: 55 findings

These 55 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026.

Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Coupling · Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft.csproj
Coupling · Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing.csproj
Coupling · Unstable project Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql.csproj
Secret Scanning · REDACTED
Secret Scanning · REDACTED
Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Messages/MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs
Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs
Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs
Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/RawSequencerConsumerBehavior.cs
Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/SequenceExtensions.cs
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Secrets (history) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/EnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/SingleMessageReturnValueHandler.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: InvokeWithStreamEnumerableAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodInvoker.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: InvokeWithActivityWithoutBlockingAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodInvoker.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core.Rx/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/ObservableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: ConnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClient.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: ReconnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClient.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: InitializeAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: StopConsumersAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: DisconnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: InvokeAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvoker.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: WriteOverflowAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/ConsumerChannel`1.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: StopReadingAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/ConsumerChannel`1.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: NotifyReadingStoppedAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/ConsumerChannel`1.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: TriggerReconnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Consumer`1.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: StartAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Consumer`1.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: CommitAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Consumer`1.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Messages/MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/RawSequencerConsumerBehavior.cs
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/SequenceExtensions.cs
Captive dependencies · Captive dependency: singleton KafkaTransactionalProducerCollection captures transient IBrokerBehaviorsProvider src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaTransactionalProducerCollection.cs
Stateful singletons · Stateful singleton: BrokerClientsConnectorService src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnectorService.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Core/Background/RecurringDistributedBackgroundService.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/DefaultProduceStrategy.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.Memory/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/InMemoryOutboxWriter.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/EntityFrameworkOutboxReader.cs
Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/EntityFrameworkOutboxWriter.cs

Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.

Fixed since the last survey: 8 findings

These 8 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit
Dependency Hygiene · Prerelease dependency: StyleCop.Analyzers
Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Diagnostics/MqttLoggerExtensions.cs

Rebuild cost: about €280,000 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€94,000 to €470,000, for 1,560 to 4,977 hours of work, about 1.9 person-years for 1 to 4 engineers
Difficulty of the problem	Very high, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor	×0.9 at a score of 63. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size	Medium: 66,910 lines of product code
Comment lines	The estimate prices 44,454 lines. Comment lines count towards the size of 66,910 lines but aren't priced as work.

How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty.

Top priorities

The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.

Raises the score by about 5 points · Low effort · ADR Quality

Resolve the 1 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with 200.md.

Raises the score by about 3 points · Low effort · Documentation Quality

Reconcile the README with reality: docs/index.md links to `/v4/`, but `v4` does not exist; tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer`, but no file or folder `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer` exists; tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/MixedWorkload`, but no file or folder `Kafka/MixedWorkload` exists; tests/extended/README.md names `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe`, but no file or folder `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe` exists.

Raises the score by about 5 points · Medium effort · Documentation accuracy

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk

This code would cost about €280,000 to build again, about 1.9 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Maturity, at 56 (Adequate). Maturity is about how well the project explains and looks after itself, which decides whether a new developer, or a new supplier, can take over. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Maturity also moves the score most.

Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Maturity grade · how much each lens counts

What to do: Start with the Maturity actions in Top priorities.

If you do one thing first · First action

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 5 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 ADR Quality findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.

Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort

Architecture — bounded-context dependency graph

Each box is a bounded context (its layer projects grouped, or a project count when large); arrows show dependencies between contexts. A shared kernel is where many arrows converge.

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.

58 modules, with 264 dependencies between them. One loop runs through 38 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 18 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →	1 Silverback	2 Silverback.ExtensibleFactories	3 Silverback.Util	4 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.BrokerMessageIdentifiersTracking	5 Silverback.Messaging.Publishing	6 Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers.ArgumentResolvers	7 Silverback.Storage.DataAccess	8 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Kafka	9 Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers	10 Silverback.Messaging.Messages	11 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Mqtt	12 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.EndpointResolvers	13 Silverback.Messaging.Sequences	14 Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.Transaction	15 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Behaviors	16 Silverback.Messaging.Producing	17 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Enrichers	18 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Filter	19 Silverback.Messaging.Serialization	20 Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.ErrorHandling	21 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.TransactionalOutbox	22 Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Mqtt	23 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Callbacks	24 Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Kafka	25 Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.KafkaOffsetStore	26 Silverback.Storage	27 Silverback.Lock	28 Silverback.Configuration	29 Silverback.Messaging.Encryption	30 Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Batch	31 Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Chunking	32 Silverback.Messaging.Configuration	33 Silverback.Messaging	34 Silverback.Messaging.Diagnostics	36 Silverback.Messaging.Broker	37 Silverback.Diagnostics	39 Silverback.Background
1 Silverback
2 Silverback.ExtensibleFactories
3 Silverback.Util
4 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.BrokerMessageIdentifiersTracking		1																														2			2
5 Silverback.Messaging.Publishing	7								2	14																									1	1
6 Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers.ArgumentResolvers									5	4
7 Silverback.Storage.DataAccess	1		2
8 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Kafka				1																			4	11	1										14	7
9 Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers	2				1	5				4																						1
10 Silverback.Messaging.Messages	2					1			4																							2	5		11
11 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Mqtt	3									3												7	2												10	5
12 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.EndpointResolvers										9												4		2								2	7
13 Silverback.Messaging.Sequences	1			1					2	10					17													1							2	5
14 Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.Transaction	3												1		6																					2
15 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Behaviors	3									2			2	1																					4
16 Silverback.Messaging.Producing	3									3					3																	3			4
17 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Enrichers										11					3																		2
18 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Filter										2					3																				1	1
19 Silverback.Messaging.Serialization	1									16					6																		12
20 Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.ErrorHandling										8					8		1																		2	6
21 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.TransactionalOutbox	10	2	6				4			4						4										3	7	2				2			3	5	1
22 Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Mqtt			2							1	2	1			3				1	2								6				9	2		2	1
23 Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Callbacks	1							6														2		1											7	2
24 Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Kafka			1					1		1		1			4								1		3							8	3		5	3
25 Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.KafkaOffsetStore	8	1					2								4									1		4		1							7
26 Silverback.Storage	6		1		1																2				2		1
27 Silverback.Lock	2	1					1																			2		4								8
28 Silverback.Configuration					1								2		1							1	1	1			4					3				1
29 Silverback.Messaging.Encryption										2					6													3
30 Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Batch	1												3		2													1								1
31 Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Chunking		1								10			6		2													1				2
32 Silverback.Messaging.Configuration	3									3		1	1			2	2	2	36	12	12	1	1	2	7		1	3	4	1	1				6	2
33 Silverback.Messaging																								2								3
34 Silverback.Messaging.Diagnostics	1	1								4					13																	2				1
35 Silverback.Messaging.BinaryMessages										3					6				4														2
36 Silverback.Messaging.Broker	5		1					8		14	4		4		18							5	2	11	1							8	1			12
37 Silverback.Diagnostics								1		3	2		3		2						1											3		1	8		1
38 Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Routing	4				5					5						1																2			4
39 Silverback.Background																											2									2
40 Silverback.Messaging.Consuming													1		3																					1

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 63% · Adequate · gated by D17 ·

The Good

D1 · .NET / C# Cyclomatic Complexity 9.5 D2 · .NET / C# Cognitive Complexity 8.1 D3 · .NET / C# God Classes 9.2 D4 · .NET / C# Code Duplication 9.6 D18 · .NET / C# Solution Shape 10.0 D39 · .NET / C# IL Efficiency 9.9 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 10.0 X1 · Repo Async correctness 7.6 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X32 · Repo Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly 10.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 7.5 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 9.8

The Bad

X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 6.8 X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 6.7 X3 · Repo Exception handling 6.3

The Ugly

D17 · .NET / C# Explicit Debt 3.3

At a glance — Architecture · 70% · Strong ·

The Good

D5 · .NET / C# Coupling 9.6 D6 · .NET / C# Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D26 · .NET / C# Project Cohesion 9.0 D27 · .NET / C# Navigability 7.4 D35 · .NET / C# Change Coupling 10.0 AX1 · Repo Captive dependencies 7.1 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 9.9 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0

The Bad

AX2 · Repo Stateful singletons 6.4

The Ugly

AX10 · Repo Code composition 4.0

At a glance — Maturity · 56% · Adequate · gated by M4 ·

The Good

D15 · .NET / C# Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D19 · .NET / C# Documentation Quality 7.4 D21 · .NET / C# Naming Consistency 10.0 D24 · .NET / C# Comment Value 9.0 D34 · .NET / C# Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.3 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0

The Bad

M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 5.0

The Ugly

D20 · .NET / C# ADR Quality 0.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 2.0

At a glance — Readiness · 67% · Adequate ·

The Good

D9 · .NET / C# Test Distribution 8.1 D10 · .NET / C# Test Quality 10.0 D11 · .NET / C# Test Reliability 10.0 D14 · .NET / C# License Compliance 10.0 ED5 · Repo Idempotency 8.6 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 8.6 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 8.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 8.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

The Bad

D13 · .NET / C# Secret Scanning 5.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 6.0

The Ugly

P5 · Repo DR & Backup 4.0

At a glance — Security · 79% · Strong ·

The Good

D28 · .NET / C# Secrets (history) 8.0 D29 · .NET / C# Static Analysis (SAST) 7.6 D44 · .NET / C# Platform End-of-Life 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0

The Bad

D31 · .NET / C# IaC & Container Security 5.9

At a glance — Event-Driven · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

ED1 · Repo Handler temporal coupling 10.0 ED4 · Repo Outbox / dual-write 10.0

At a glance — Performance · 79% · Strong ·

The Good

PF1 · Repo Benchmark discipline 9.5 PF2 · Repo Allocation hygiene 9.3

The Bad

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 5.9

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration	10	High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures	5	High / Critical
A05:2025 — Injection	3	High / Critical

Roadmap

First, address the missing Architectural Decision Records by resolving the current gap and establishing a consistent process for documenting future design choices. Simultaneously, correct the documentation inaccuracies by reconciling the README files with the actual codebase structure and fixing the identified documentation quality issues. Finally, eliminate the explicit technical debt by resolving the 146 analyzer findings, beginning with the .editorconfig file.

Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.	+5.1 pts	Low	ADR Quality
Resolve the 1 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with 200.md.	+3.0 pts	Low	Documentation Quality
Reconcile the README with reality: docs/index.md links to `/v4/`, but `v4` does not exist; tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer`, but no file or folder `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer` exists; tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/MixedWorkload`, but no file or folder `Kafka/MixedWorkload` exists; tests/extended/README.md names `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe`, but no file or folder `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe` exists.	+4.9 pts	Medium	Documentation accuracy
Resolve the 8 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs (2), MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs, TypesCache.cs.	+2.1 pts	Low	Explicit Debt
Resolve the 9 FileScopedPragmaDisable finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with BrokerStatistics.cs, ConsumerGroupStatistics.cs, ExactlyOnceSemanticsStatistics.cs.	+2.1 pts	Low	Explicit Debt
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.	+4.0 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED (2).	+1.4 pts	Low	Secret Scanning
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.	+2.3 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 100 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 1% slop · 46% mixed · 53% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	0.0	Slop	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
samples/.editorconfig	5.2	Mixed	Explicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
tests/extended/.editorconfig	5.2	Mixed	Explicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
tests/.editorconfig	5.2	Mixed	Explicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
tests/extended/Silverback.Tests.Extended.Integration/.editorconfig	5.2	Mixed	Explicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
tests/extended/Silverback.Tests.Extended.Benchmarks/.editorconfig	5.2	Mixed	Explicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
.editorconfig	5.2	Mixed	Explicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
tools/.editorconfig	5.2	Mixed	Explicit Debt: AnalyzerSeverityNone
Directory.Build.props	5.8	Mixed	Explicit Debt: NoWarnInCsproj
REDACTED	6.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs	6.4	Mixed	Explicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Kafka/ChunkingTests.Batch.cs	6.5	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs	6.6	Mixed	God Classes: MethodTooLong: DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForClientConfig
src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs	7.0	Mixed	God Classes: ClassTooLong: MessageWrapper
docs/v4/styles/lunr.js	7.0	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cyclomatic 22)
src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs	7.1	Mixed	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (11 members, 50+ identical tokens)
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Testing/KafkaTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs	7.3	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT.Testing/Testing/MqttTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs	7.3	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs	7.4	Mixed	Code Duplication: Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens)

How the grades work

Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.

Critical — 181

A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here tends to cause failures elsewhere.

Serious — 198

Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to carry for two years either.

Minor — 105

Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions. Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.

Could not be resolved — 3

Something this survey could not settle from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each one is named under Limitations.

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 73 of 79 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 6 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.

What we checked — 79 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D10D11D13D14D15D17D18D19D20D21D24D26D27D28D29D31D34D35D39D44AX1AX10AX2AX3AX4AX5AX6AX8ED1ED4ED5GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P5P6PF1PF2PF3X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X32X4X5

Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.

How to trust any code-health report — three questions

Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 452 of 484 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.

Tools & methods

The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.

Method	Backs	Version	Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis	Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering	5.3.0	✓ deterministic
Native secret scanner	Hardcoded secrets / credentials	1.0.0	✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)	Code duplication	1.0.0	✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)	Line & branch coverage	10.0.400	✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnet	Outdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies	10.0.400	✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2Sharp	Churn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history	2.43.0 · 0.31.0	✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkov	Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR	1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533	✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)	Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurement	Local LLM	◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a161be-2ebf-777a-926b-551bccac45b8.

The exact command behind every deep-scan dimension — tool, version, invocation and retained raw output — is in Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail.

Run transparency — what happened this run

What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.

D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `dotnet list package` did not return usable output (restore or query failed); no outdated/vulnerable/deprecated data to assess. The tool said: samples/MQTT/Basic.Producer/Basic.Producer.csproj : error NU1102: Unable to find package Silverback.Integration.Mqtt with version (>= 5.6.0) [samples/Silverback.Samples.sln].
D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (20 contributor(s) across 1692 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 95% of the history; the other 19 hold 0.3% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D17 Explicit Debt — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The C# workspace loaded this repository's projects but reported a load failure, and the dead-code reference search is unreliable over a graph that did not load cleanly, so it was skipped. The other debt markers on this row were read; dead symbols were not, and their absence from the score is not a finding that the code has none. First load diagnostic: Failure: Msbuild failed when processing the file 'src/Silverback.Core/Silverback.Core.csproj' with message: The URL of repository remote 'origin' is invalid: ''.
D18 Solution Shape — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The build did not finish within its budget on this run; structural metrics are reported, build/warning status is unknown.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Large codebase (63,197 production LoC in the .NET projects) with no declared bounded contexts — cross-boundary type coupling is unassessed Bounded contexts cannot be inferred from a codebase that is not physically organised by them (D-321), so with none declared there are no boundaries for the coupling pass to measure across. You can widen what we reach: name this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2 module groups, e.g. per subsystem) so cross-boundary type coupling can be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D31 IaC & Container Security — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. Tests/extended/Silverback.Tests.Extended.Integration.Worker/Dockerfile.dockerignore carries no `FROM` instruction, so it declares no build stage and every Dockerfile rule this engine owns — the runtime-hardening, key-material, mutable-clone, no-op-shim, build-context, trust-anchor, install-guard, setuid and world-writable-path rules — is outside its own premise there and returned nothing. That silence is deliberate and correct: with no base image there is no image to reason about. It is reported here because it is NOT the same fact as a clean file, and coverage is stated as 3 of 4 Infrastructure-as-Code manifest(s) fully judged rather than as 100%. The vendor scanners (trivy, checkov) do read these files and their findings above stand; only this engine's own stage-keyed rules are absent. No owner action: a build file with no FROM is a legitimate include fragment.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/IAggregateRoot.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/IDomainEvent.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/ICommand.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/ICommand`1.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/IEvent.cs`, … (+52 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via DockerCompose (REDACTED). compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — schema-registry Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden emqx2 Error context canceled emqx1 Error context canceled mqttx-web Error context canceled postgresql Error context canceled conduktor Error context canceled kafka-2 Error context canceled haproxy Error context canceled pgadmin Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: haproxy Pulling schema-registry Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden conduktor Error context canceled haproxy Error context canceled pgadmin Error context canceled mqttx-web Error context canceled emqx1 Error context canceled postgresql Error context canceled kafka-1 Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped.
P8 Schema migrations — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Every other migration runner — DbUp, FluentMigrator, Evolve, Flyway, Liquibase, RoundhousE, a hand-rolled versioned-SQL runner — is invisible to the detector, so an absence here is our blind spot rather than a missing migration strategy in the repository. The card abstains instead of scoring. You can widen what we reach: if the schema is created and evolved by a tool other than EF Core migrations, naming it lets us teach the detector to read it.
X2 Cancellation propagation — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 109 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 149.
Package restore incomplete — third-party types were unresolved in part of the solution — NuGet restore did not complete for samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer.csproj, samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer.csproj, samples/Kafka/Basic.Consumer/Basic.Consumer.csproj, samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/Basic.Producer.csproj, samples/MQTT/Basic.Consumer/Basic.Consumer.csproj and 17 more, so those projects were analysed with framework references only: every check keyed on a third-party type saw an error type there and reported nothing. Findings on those projects are a lower bound; run `dotnet restore` on them and rescan.

Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.

Limitations & what we did not check

Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.

Per-dimension blind spots

For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
D11 Test Reliability: Flakiness is inferred from history/markers — Watchdog runs the suite once (for coverage), not the repeated runs under varied conditions that reveal nondeterminism, so a flaky test never recorded as failing is invisible here.
D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
ED5 Idempotency: Idempotency is judged from the handler body's visible writes and guards — a guard enforced by a database unique constraint, a broker's exactly-once delivery, or a domain method whose no-op-when-applied logic the scan can't follow may read as at-risk; the at-risk candidates are confirmed by a SAMPLED LLM verdict (advisory, not exhaustive) and degrade to heuristic-only when no model is configured. It flags the at-least-once double-apply SHAPE, not a runtime proof of a duplicate effect.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (6): D19, D21, D24, D26, ED5, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.5 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.

Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString at 22. A further 4 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForClientConfig at 94 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 2 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold methods was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs (DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForClientConfig at 94), tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.MqttConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs (DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForMqttClientOptions at 22). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cyclomatic 22)docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1227

What to do

Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cyclomatic 22). — Refactoring it lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.5 to about 10.0/10.
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity8.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.

Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

6 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString at 57.

lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cognitive 57)docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1227

lunr.lunr.Index.query (cognitive 34)docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1752

lunr.lunr.Builder.add (cognitive 23)docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:2104

lunr.lunr.TokenSet.intersect (cognitive 19)docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1498

lunr.lunr.QueryLexer.lexText (cognitive 19)docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:2649

+ 1 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Bring the 2 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cognitive 57), lunr.lunr.Index.query (cognitive 34). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 2 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 8.1 to about 8.8/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 30; a cleaner split scores higher.
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes9.2 / 10Stronggated by 15 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").

Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

15 god class(es) detected.

TooManyMethods: KafkaClientsConfigurationBuilder · ×8src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaClientsConfigurationBuilder.cs

MethodTooLong: DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForClientConfig · ×3tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs:52

FileTooLong: styles/lunr.js · ×2docs/v4/styles/lunr.js

ClassTooLong: DocumentationProvider · ×2tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs

What to do

Resolve the 8 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with KafkaClientsConfigurationBuilder.cs, KafkaClientConfigurationBuilder`1.cs, SilverbackBuilder.AddSubscriber.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with DocumentationProvider.cs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with lunr.js, DocumentationProvider.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.6 / 10Stronggated by 52 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Copy-pasted code that should be shared instead.

Method: Code duplication via token-stream sliding windows with type-aware normalization (locals masked, type names preserved), density-scored per KLoC of production code. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

49 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 3 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. 8 of the 52 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population.

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×4src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:134

Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) · ×3src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:421

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×3src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:129

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×3tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs:29

Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) · ×2src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:101

+ 33 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with SchemaRegistryDeserializerBuilder`1.cs (2), OutboxProduceStrategy.cs, BuilderGenerator.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with MessageWrapper.cs (2), DefaultProduceStrategy.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with DataAccess`3.cs, OutboxProduceStrategy.cs, PostgreSqlKafkaOffsetStore.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling9.6 / 10Stronggated by 3 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether volatile projects sit underneath others that depend on them (so their churn ripples upward), and whether project dependencies form cycles. A widely-depended-on but stable shared/kernel project is healthy, not penalised.

Method: Dependency cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, plus Martin instability (afferent/efferent) per project. Exhaustive over the reference graph, deterministic.

Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: afferent/efferent coupling + cycles computed over every production type — the population is all types, not a name convention.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

70 projects, 0 dependency cycle(s), 3 unstable depended-on project(s).

Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoftsrc/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft.csproj:1

Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testingsrc/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing.csproj:1

Unstable project Silverback.Storage.PostgreSqlsrc/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql.csproj:1

What to do

Resolve the 1 Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft finding(s) in Coupling — start with Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing finding(s) in Coupling — start with Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Unstable project Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql finding(s) in Coupling — start with Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether a class's methods are focused on a single responsibility.

Method: LCOM4 cohesion per production class with at least two methods: connected components of methods sharing state or calls, computed syntactically. Deterministic, not a proxy.

Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: LCOM4 cohesion computed over every production class — the population is all types, not a name convention.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 of 158 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test Distribution8.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.

Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3223 test methods: 793 unit, 2009 integration, 0 BDD, 421 e2e.

Inverted test pyramid

What to do

Resolve the 1 Inverted test pyramid finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D10 · Test Quality10.0 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.

Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

2 skipped (2 with a documented reason), 0 zero-assertion, 1 synchronised by a fixed sleep, 20 mock references across 3270 tests.

Fixed-sleep synchronisation: Commit_ShouldRespectGroupMembership_WithStaticAssignmenttests/extended/Silverback.Tests.Extended.Integration/Kafka/StaticAssignmentTests.cs:36

Mock framework: NSubstitute · ×20

Skipped (documented): Invoke_ShouldSwallowHandlerExceptions · ×2tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvokerTests.cs:126

What to do

Resolve the 1 Fixed-sleep synchronisation finding(s) in Test Quality — start with StaticAssignmentTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D11 · Test Reliability10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the tests pass reliably, with no flakiness.

Method: Suite re-run N times within tiered wall-clock budgets (unit to e2e); tests failing non-deterministically across runs flagged; guarded tests retried when #if guards detected.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 flaky across 2 measured tier(s). unit: measured (0 flaky); integration: measured (0 flaky); e2e: not included — too large to re-run within its budget.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d11_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D13 · Secret Scanning5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.

Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Enforce Secret Scanning in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D14 · License Compliance10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether the licenses of third-party packages are compatible with your policy.

Method: Third-party package licenses resolved from declared package metadata and checked against the configured policy (allow/deny/copyleft). Deterministic; clean = no incompatible license found at metadata depth.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 of 184 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 53 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 167 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Stronggated by 3 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Files that change often and are also complex — the riskiest hotspots.

Method: Per production file churn times cyclomatic complexity over a rolling window, computed from git and Roslyn/JS/Razor analysis. Exhaustive, deterministic per commit date.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Top hotspots: src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cs (6×15=90) Repeated repair below the complexity floor: src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttClientWrapper.cs (3 of 3 changes were fixes); src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/MqttConsumer.cs (3 of 3 changes were fixes)

Repeated repair: src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttClientWrapper.cs · ×2src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttClientWrapper.cs:181

Hotspot: src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cssrc/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cs:354

What to do

Resolve the 2 Repeated repair finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with MqttClientWrapper.cs, MqttConsumer.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with KafkaConsumer.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt3.3 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.

Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 3.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

290 deducted debt markers + unmeasured dead symbols across 63197 LoC in the .NET projects (3.3/KLoC) → score 3.3. Dead code not measured: the solution did not load cleanly, so the reference search was skipped.

AnalyzerSeverityNone · ×146.editorconfig:27

FileScopedPragmaDisable · ×9src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/BrokerStatistics.cs:8

EmptyCatchBlock · ×8src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Messages/MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs:138

NoWarnInCsproj · ×5Directory.Packages.props:5

TodoComment · ×15src/Silverback.Core.Rx/Messaging/Subscribers/MessageStreamObservable`1.cs:35

+ 2 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 146 AnalyzerSeverityNone finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with .editorconfig (146). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (146 issue-level).
Resolve the 9 FileScopedPragmaDisable finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with BrokerStatistics.cs, ConsumerGroupStatistics.cs, ExactlyOnceSemanticsStatistics.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 issue-level).
Resolve the 8 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs (2), MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs, TypesCache.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 issue-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D18 · Solution Shape10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the solution is laid out in a sensible, conventional structure.

Method: Solution structure: project count, decomposition, shell-project detection, build success (confirmed failures cap the score); traced to actual .sln files and binaries. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

70 projects, 1563 source files, 142169 hand-written lines of code (63197 production / 78972 test — the split is derived per file: test is what its project, its own path, or a compile-guarded region marks as test, and a file carrying no test signal counts as production), 133 inter-project edges (build status unknown — did not finish). Measured across 2 solutions loaded as one workspace: `Silverback.sln`, `samples/Silverback.Samples.sln`.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether the project's documentation is clear, complete, and useful.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic doc sample (READMEs plus first 25 architecture docs), with two-pass stability filtering. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Strong / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The repository is well documented: the root README gives a strong overview (what Silverback is and its four core values), project status with CI/Sonar badges, a Why Silverback section, supported .NET versions, and links to the full changelog. The samples/README documents that directory's samples; tests/extended/README describes an extended testbench and build/ci commands. A dedicated docs/contributing.md explains source-code, versioning, commit conventions, NuGet packaging, testing, and contributor attribution. There is a thin gap between the root README and the architecture/design docs (1201 of them), but the visible content is clear and complete for its scope. The repository's documentation is strong with a comprehensive changelog (1204 documents) covering every release version of Silverback and a detailed guides directory for message-bus usage, domain events, and logging/tracing. The changelogs are well-structured releases notes with What's New, Fixes, and links to specific issues, while the guides give concrete code examples and interface references (e.g. <xref:Silverback.Messaging.Messages.IEvent>). There is no visible gap in coverage between the two document types; both READMEs and architecture/design docs would benefit from a project overview, installation/usage section, or contribution guide but those are not shown here. (9 of 25 sampled documents could not be assessed: 1 of 3 evaluation groups failed.)

Documentation: contradicts the codedocs/changelog/200.md

XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Core · ×47src/Silverback.Core/Silverback.Core.csproj

What to do

Resolve the 1 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with 200.md. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether architecture decisions are recorded well (context, decision, consequences).

Method: Per-ADR judgment by language model at low temperature with two-pass stability; confidence is share of ADRs evaluated; enforcement-field presence detected deterministically. Advisory.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d20_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether names — types, methods, variables — are clear and consistent.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic random symbol sample (fixed size, not exhaustive), with disclosed confidence band. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D24 · Comment ValueExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether comments are worth it — explaining WHY (valuable) rather than WHAT (redundant).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on deterministically sampled inline comments with surrounding code; findings verified back to sampled comments by substring match. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

90 valuable / 0 redundant across 200 sampled comments.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether each project is a focused, coherent unit rather than an oversized grab-bag.

Method: Project size overshoot penalties (LoC / public-type count / namespace count, 2-of-3 flag) weighted by log magnitude. Exhaustive across projects, deterministic, LLM-independent.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

4 of 70 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split Silverback.Integration

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D27 · Navigability7.4 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps. C# also names each pass-through layer (a class whose every public method only forwards its own parameters to one collaborator) as a located finding; the score is not affected.

Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

70 % of calls cross a namespace and 7 % go through an interface, but 86 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: large — vertical-slice locality expected.

Pass-through layer · ×6src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Publishing/ApplicationPublisher.Command.cs:10

What to do

Resolve the 6 Pass-through layer finding(s) in Navigability — start with ApplicationPublisher.Command.cs, ApplicationPublisher.Query.cs, ErrorPolicyBuilder.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)8.0 / 10Adequategated by 2 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.

Method: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 finding(s): 0 critical, 2 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 2 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)7.6 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.

Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 2 medium, 0 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 59 file(s) — `docs/v4/styles/docfx.vendor.js`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/IAggregateRoot.cs` (lines 11–12), `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/IDomainEvent.cs` (line 11), `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/ICommand.cs` (lines 11–12), `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/ICommand`1.cs` (lines 14–15), … (+54 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. In 2 of those file(s) — `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Messages/RawMessage`1.cs`, `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Messages/StringMessage`1.cs` — the break is a C# primary constructor, which semgrep's grammar cannot parse and which hides the type from every rule scoped to it; those files were re-scanned from a shadow copy with the constructor's parameter list blanked (line and column preserving), which restores the type to the rules, and 0 additional row(s) came from that pass. Only the header's own parameter list is unread in them. In 2 of those file(s) — `src/Silverback.Core/Util/EnumerableAsCollectionExtensions.cs`, `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Enrichers/GenericOutboundHeadersEnricher`1.cs` — the break is at a TYPE DECLARATION (a C# primary constructor semgrep's grammar cannot parse), so the loss is wider than the named lines: rules scoped to that type see no type to scope to and are blind over its whole body, while rules matching statements keep working there. Absence of a type-scoped finding in those types is not evidence of anything.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security~~7.8~~ 5.9 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether Dockerfiles / Terraform / Kubernetes config follow security best practices.

Method: IaC/container misconfiguration scan via trivy config (Dockerfile/Terraform/K8s/Helm/CloudFormation); severity rules to 0-10 moderate normalizer. NotApplicable without manifests. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 75% · ceiling Documented

10 finding(s): 0 critical, 5 high, 5 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 5 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
Resolve the 5 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D34 · Knowledge Freshness10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.

Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 290 of the 801 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.

Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.

Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D39 · IL Efficiency9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Method: IL instruction count per method, read from the BUILT first-party assemblies via Mono.Cecil (the target is compiled on a deep run); scored on the fraction of methods whose emitted IL body exceeds the size threshold. Sees compiler-generated bloat source can't; not-applicable when the target fails to build. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

14 of 3452 first-party methods have an oversized IL body.

IL efficiency: 14 authored method(s) exceed the IL budgettools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs:54

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d39_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D44 · Platform End-of-Life10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether anyone still ships security patches for the platform this repository RUNS ON — the runtime it pins and the framework majors its own constraints hold it to. Separate from D12 because the question differs: a current Django on an end-of-life Python is perfectly up to date and completely unsupported, and the fix is a migration rather than a version bump. What the repository says it merely SUPPORTS is never charged.

Method: End-of-life PLATFORM read from the repository's own declarations and graded against a FROZEN, dated table of vendor support dates — no network, no feed, no API, so this dimension answers identically inside a closed scan fence. Two subjects: a RUNTIME the project pins (a single or all-end-of-life TargetFramework, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a requires-python CAP) and a FRAMEWORK major a dependency constraint cannot move off (a caret, tilde or exact version; `vue@^2.7.16` pins Vue 2). A FLOOR is deliberately never charged — `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what a package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on — and a multi-target project is charged only when EVERY target is out of support. Runtime 4.0/product capped 8.0, framework 1.5 capped 4.5. The table is safe to freeze because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false: it loses recall as it ages, never precision, and a test asserts every entry predates the freeze date. Disjoint from D31 (a container image's OS layer) and D29 (the toolchain a CI workflow installs). Abstains when the repository declares no platform this pass reads — never scores it clean.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 80 platform declaration(s) and 0 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

R = React/JS · M = Maturity · P = Readiness.

AX1 · Captive dependencies7.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether any singleton service captures a scoped/transient dependency — a silent lifetime/threading bug.

Method: Roslyn scan: DI registrations parsed from AddSingleton/Scoped/Transient; each singleton checked for captured shorter-lifetime dependencies. Exhaustive, deterministic.

`BrokerClientsConnector` is registered as a SINGLETON but its constructor takes `BrokerClientsBootstrapper brokerClientsBootstrapper`, which is registered as Transient. The singleton captures one instance of the transient dependency forever — defeating its lifetime (a per-request DbContext shared across all requests is a classic data-corruption/threading bug). Make the singleton resolve `BrokerClientsBootstrapper` per-use (inject `IServiceScopeFactory` or a factory func), or align the lifetimes. — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs:37
`KafkaTransactionalProducerCollection` is registered as a SINGLETON but its constructor takes `IBrokerBehaviorsProvider behaviorsProvider`, which is registered as Transient. The singleton captures one instance of the transient dependency forever — defeating its lifetime (a per-request DbContext shared across all requests is a classic data-corruption/threading bug). Make the singleton resolve `IBrokerBehaviorsProvider` per-use (inject `IServiceScopeFactory` or a factory func), or align the lifetimes. — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaTransactionalProducerCollection.cs:41

What to do

Don't inject scoped/transient services into singletons; resolve them per-use via IServiceScopeFactory or a factory delegate, or align the lifetimes.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX10 · Code composition4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does.

Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.

Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.

What to do

The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX2 · Stateful singletons6.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether singleton services avoid mutable shared instance state that concurrent callers would race on.

Method: Roslyn scan: singleton field mutations unguarded by lock or Interlocked, per type; syntax-based guard detection. Deterministic, traceable per field.

`SubscribedMethodsCache` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_subscribedMethods, _hasAnyMessageStreamSubscriber; e.g. `_subscribedMethods` at line 109). — src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodsCache.cs:15
`ObservableStreamMessageArgumentResolver` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_createObservableMethodInfo; e.g. `_createObservableMethodInfo` at line 51). — src/Silverback.Core.Rx/Messaging/Subscribers/ArgumentResolvers/ObservableStreamMessageArgumentResolver.cs:17
`BrokerClientCallbacksInvoker` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_callbackTypes; e.g. `_callbackTypes` at line 195). — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvoker.cs:16
`BrokerClientsConnectorService` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_stoppingTask; e.g. `_stoppingTask` at line 68). — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnectorService.cs:14

What to do

Keep singletons stateless or back their state with thread-safe types (Concurrent*/Immutable*); otherwise concurrent callers race.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX3 · Project dependency cycles10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).

Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.

The namespaces Silverback.Background ↔ Silverback.Configuration ↔ Silverback.Diagnostics ↔ Silverback.Lock ↔ Silverback.Messaging ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Behaviors ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.BrokerMessageIdentifiersTracking ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Callbacks ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Callbacks.Statistics ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Kafka ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Mqtt ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Kafka ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Mqtt ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.ErrorHandling ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.KafkaOffsetStore ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.Transaction ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Diagnostics ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Encryption ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Messages ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.EndpointResolvers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Enrichers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Filter ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.TransactionalOutbox ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Publishing ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Sequences ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Batch ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Chunking ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Serialization ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers.ArgumentResolvers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers.Subscriptions ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Transactions ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Validation ↔ Silverback.Storage depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Silverback.Configuration → Silverback.Diagnostics (Silverback.Configuration.SilverbackBuilder → Silverback.Diagnostics.LogLevelConfigurator, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — src/Silverback.Core/Configuration/SilverbackBuilder.AddBehavior.cs:14

What to do

Break namespace cycles inside a project by moving the shared type to a namespace both sides can use, or by inverting the back edge behind an interface.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX4 · Dependency direction10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.

Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX5 · Architecture & structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the codebase has a recognisable, scale-appropriate structure (a named architectural style, or modular enough for its size) rather than being an ad-hoc ball of mud.

Method: Roslyn plus csproj analysis: architecture style detection (DDD, clean, vertical-slice, CQRS) and structure fitness for repo size. Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX6 · Interface segregation9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether interfaces stay focused rather than fat — the Interface-Segregation principle (SOLID 'I').

Method: Roslyn scan: public interface declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.

`IProducer` declares 19 members under just 7 distinct name(s): `Name`, `DisplayName`, `EndpointConfiguration`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `ProduceAsync`, `ProduceAsync`, `RawProduceAsync`, `RawProduceAsync`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. That is an OVERLOAD SET, not 19 separate responsibilities: a caller binds to 7 operation(s) and uses the overload it selected, so the Interface-Segregation harm does NOT apply on the caller's side and splitting this into role-interfaces would scatter one operation without relieving anything. The burden that does remain is the IMPLEMENTER's — all 19 signatures must be written and kept in step. Reduce it by collapsing overloads (optional or default parameters, or an options object) rather than by segregating the interface. — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/IProducer.cs:17
`IIntegrationPublisher` declares 35 members under just 4 distinct name(s): `WrapAndPublishAsync`, `WrapAndPublishAsync`, `WrapAndPublishAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublish`, `WrapAndPublish`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. That is an OVERLOAD SET, not 35 separate responsibilities: a caller binds to 4 operation(s) and uses the overload it selected, so the Interface-Segregation harm does NOT apply on the caller's side and splitting this into role-interfaces would scatter one operation without relieving anything. The burden that does remain is the IMPLEMENTER's — all 35 signatures must be written and kept in step. Reduce it by collapsing overloads (optional or default parameters, or an options object) rather than by segregating the interface. — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IIntegrationPublisher.cs:15
`ISequence` declares 21 members: `SequenceId`, `Length`, `TotalLength`, `IsNew`, `IsPending`, `IsCompleting`, `IsComplete`, `IsAborted`, `IsBeingConsumed`, `AbortReason`, `AbortException`, `Sequences`, `ParentSequence`, `Context`, `StreamProvider`, `CreateStream`, `AddAsync`, `AbortIfIncompleteAsync`, `AbortAsync`, `GetCommitIdentifiers`, `GetRollbackIdentifiers`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/ISequence.cs:20
`ITestingHelper` declares 18 members under just 8 distinct name(s): `Spy`, `GetConsumer`, `GetConsumerForEndpoint`, `GetProducerForEndpoint`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilOutboxIsEmptyAsync`, `WaitUntilOutboxIsEmptyAsync`, `IsOutboxEmptyAsync`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. That is an OVERLOAD SET, not 18 separate responsibilities: a caller binds to 8 operation(s) and uses the overload it selected, so the Interface-Segregation harm does NOT apply on the caller's side and splitting this into role-interfaces would scatter one operation without relieving anything. The burden that does remain is the IMPLEMENTER's — all 18 signatures must be written and kept in step. Reduce it by collapsing overloads (optional or default parameters, or an options object) rather than by segregating the interface. — src/Silverback.Integration.Testing/Testing/ITestingHelper`1.cs:9

What to do

Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
Where the width is an overload set rather than separate responsibilities, collapse the overloads instead — segregating those relieves no caller.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX8 · Test isolation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether production projects stay free of references to test projects — tests may depend on production, never the reverse.

Method: Csproj graph: each production project checked for references to test projects (identified by test-framework presence, not name). Zero violations is clean. Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ED1 · Handler temporal coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether event handlers stay asynchronous (no blocking remote HTTP/gRPC calls awaited inside a handler).

Method: Roslyn semantic scan (event-driven gated): event-handler bodies scanned for HTTP/gRPC invocations by resolved symbol type, not substring. Deterministic, semantic-resolved.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ED4 · Outbox / dual-write10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Event-Driven — Whether state changes and message publishes are atomic (a transactional outbox) rather than a crash-unsafe dual write.

Method: Roslyn semantic scan (event-driven gated): event-handler methods scanned for DB-save plus bus-publish without a transactional outbox reference. Deterministic, semantic-resolved.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ED5 · Idempotency8.6 / 10Strong◐ Sampled · advisory

Other · Readiness — Whether retry-prone mutations (command handlers + message/event consumers) are idempotent so an at-least-once redelivery or client retry doesn't double-apply the effect — heuristic at-risk detection confirmed by language model, advisory.

Method: Roslyn heuristic (any mutation, ungated): command handlers and message/event consumers that mutate persistent state without a visible idempotency guard (exists/dedup check, upsert, idempotency-key/inbox, conditional/versioned write, fixed-value set) flagged as at-risk; each at-risk candidate then confirmed or cleared by a language model as genuinely non-idempotent versus naturally-idempotent. Advisory without a model (heuristic-only, degraded), per-candidate judged with one.

Coverage: Population: retry-prone mutations — command handlers (CQRS write side) + message/event consumers (IConsumer/I*EventHandler) — that mutate persistent state; runs on any repo with mutations, not only event-driven ones. The at-risk subset (no obvious guard) is a HEURISTIC candidate set, each then LLM-JUDGED non-idempotent vs safe; a handler outside those conventions, or a guard the LLM can't confirm, is bounded by the sample. Degrades to heuristic-only when no model is configured.

`ReturnValueHandlers.AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.Handle` mutates persistent state (an event publish) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write. — src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs:40
`Producer.ProducerBackgroundService.ExecuteAsync` mutates persistent state (an event publish one hop away, in ProducerBackgroundService.ProduceMessageAsync) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write. (×2) — samples/Kafka/Avro.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:32, samples/Kafka/JsonSchemaRegistry.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:31

What to do

Make retry-prone mutations idempotent — guard each write with an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write, so a re-run doesn't double-apply.

Do you agree with this assessment?

GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue: shipped members still throwing NotImplementedException, and placeholder string literals left in non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: NotImplementedException throws and placeholder string literals in non-test, non-generated shipped code. Deterministic, code-shape signature.

Do you agree with this assessment?

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords: members that only throw a "not implemented" exception, methods that take inputs and return a constant, async methods that never await, dead `if (false)` / `#if false` branches, and skeleton types most of whose members are holes. A real, objective slice of technical debt.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

A test is skipped with reason "TODO: Check why this was the expected behavior" — the behavior it asserts is UNVERIFIED and this skip is likely the only marker of a real bug. It ages invisibly: fix the flakiness or track the bug somewhere that can't be forgotten. (×2) — tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvokerTests.cs:126, tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvokerTests.cs:279

What to do

Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)7.3 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.

Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.

What to do

Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 70 of 70 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.

Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.

No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.

What to do

Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M3 · Folder & project structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo is organised deliberately — src/test separation and consistent project naming.

Method: Filesystem scan: src/test folder separation and namespace-prefix consistency (majority RootNamespace agreement). Exhaustive across projects, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation accuracy2.0 / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.

docs/index.md links to `/v4/`, but `v4` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/index.md:63
tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer`, but no file or folder `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — tests/extended/README.md:92
tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/MixedWorkload`, but no file or folder `Kafka/MixedWorkload` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — tests/extended/README.md:92
tests/extended/README.md names `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe`, but no file or folder `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — tests/extended/README.md:92

What to do

Reconcile the README with reality: docs/index.md links to `/v4/`, but `v4` does not exist; tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer`, but no file or folder `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer` exists; tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/MixedWorkload`, but no file or folder `Kafka/MixedWorkload` exists; tests/extended/README.md names `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe`, but no file or folder `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe` exists.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P1 · CI/CD gates10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.

Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P10 · Library API & versioning6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.

Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

611/868 types (70%) are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — make internal-by-default and expose only the intended API.

What to do

Make types internal by default; expose only the deliberate public API so internals can change without breaking consumers.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability8.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.

Method: Filesystem/Roslyn scan: structured-logging frameworks (Serilog, NLog), OpenTelemetry, and health-check endpoint patterns. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Only 29/34 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log). Of those 34, 20 ship a process this repository operates; the rest are libraries their consumer hosts, where the logging decision belongs to the host.

What to do

Extend structured logging across the projects you operate, and give the library ones a diagnostics seam instead — an `EventSource`/`ActivitySource` the host can subscribe to, or an optional logger on your options object — rather than taking a logging dependency on your consumers' behalf.
Add a health-check endpoint (AddHealthChecks/MapHealthChecks) so orchestrators and load balancers can probe liveness/readiness.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).

Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.

What to do

Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are automated and safely reversible (probes, rolling updates, approval gates) — from manifests/pipeline files, not the live environment.

Method: Filesystem scan: deployment manifests/IaC (K8s YAML, Helm, Terraform) for rolling updates, probes, approval gates, migration hooks. Exhaustive, deterministic.

What to do

Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P5 · DR & Backup4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether disaster recovery is planned and codified — backups, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees — from IaC + container manifests + docs, never the live cloud.

Method: Filesystem scan: disaster recovery, backup, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees from IaC, manifests, and docs. Exhaustive, deterministic, never a live environment.

What to do

Document RTO/RPO and a tested restore procedure (a backup config alone isn't disaster recovery).
No persistence guard on critical data stores — use Docker named volumes (or your orchestrator's persistent-volume equivalent) so the data store can't be wiped by a container recreate (or, in cloud, set purge-protection / soft-delete / prevent_destroy).

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are traceable — a maintained changelog and explicit version stamping.

Method: Filesystem scan: changelog file presence and version tags in csproj or git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF1 · Benchmark discipline9.5 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code protects its performance with benchmarks — a benchmark suite, allocation/memory measurement, and (ideally) a CI gate. Presence is credited as a bonus, never a deduction.

Method: Repo + source scan: BenchmarkDotNet referenced (csproj/source), [Benchmark]/[MemoryDiagnoser] attribute counts, and a benchmark step in CI; off .NET, the same ladder over Go testing.B, Rust criterion/#[bench]/divan, JMH/kotlinx-benchmark, pytest-benchmark/asv/pyperf, tinybench/mitata/vitest bench/benchmark.js and Swift package-benchmark — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF2 · Allocation hygiene9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's memory manager — buffer/slice views over copies, object pooling, stack or value-type allocation, and buffer writers. Reward-only: credited where present, never penalised where a simpler style is fine.

Method: Production-source scan: density (per 1k LoC) of allocation-aware APIs — in .NET Span/Memory, ArrayPool/ObjectPool, stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs, IBufferWriter, string.Create, SkipLocalsInit; off .NET, with comments and strings blanked, Go's sync.Pool, preallocated slices/maps, Grow, strconv.Append* and buf[:0] reuse; the JVM's NIO buffer views, MemorySegment, primitive collections, pools and literal presizes (plus Kotlin primitive arrays and value classes, Scala AnyVal and @specialized); Swift's reserveCapacity, ContiguousArray, withUnsafe* access and ~Copyable. Activated off .NET on the same floor (400 lines, and benchmarks or 8 uses); Rust and garbage-collected scripting languages are not applicable. Reward-only. Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

What to do

Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 463 use(s) across 70,419 production line(s) (~6.6/1k). More Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc and ValueTask on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene5.9 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code stays responsive — it avoids sync-over-async blocking (a .NET .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult(), a time.sleep or blocking HTTP call inside a Python coroutine, a *Sync call inside an async JavaScript function, block_on inside a Rust async fn, runBlocking inside a Kotlin suspend function, block() inside a Reactor publisher) that stalls a thread or event loop and risks deadlock, and, where the code is a reusable library on .NET, awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) so it never captures and stalls its caller's context.

Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking counted everywhere — .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in .NET; off .NET, read from the language model, a blocking call inside an async function (Python, TS/JS, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, Dart) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux or a Scala method returning a Future or effect — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

5 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). (×5) — src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:17, src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:26, src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:35, …
`await using … = lockHandle` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`. — src/Silverback.Core/Background/RecurringDistributedBackgroundService.cs:65
`await foreach (… in envelopes.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`. (×2) — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/DefaultProduceStrategy.cs:111, src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:154
`await foreach (… in outboxMessages.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`. (×2) — src/Silverback.Storage.Memory/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/InMemoryOutboxWriter.cs:76, src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/EntityFrameworkOutboxWriter.cs:87
`await foreach (… in items.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`. — src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:153
`await dbContext.Set<SilverbackOutboxMessage>() .AsNoTracking() .DefaultIfEmpty() .M...` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`. — src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/EntityFrameworkOutboxReader.cs:90

What to do

Make the call chain async end-to-end and await it — never block on a Task with .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult().

Do you agree with this assessment?

X1 · Async correctness7.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether the code avoids sync-over-async (deadlock-prone blocking on tasks) and async void.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: async methods scanned for .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() and async-void outside event handlers. Deterministic, hard fact per invocation.

Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process. (×4) — src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:17, src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:26, src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:35, …

What to do

Sync-over-async (deadlock risk)

Do you agree with this assessment?

X12 · Unreachable branch10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether any branch is dead by construction — a switch arm whose label can never equal a case-normalised subject, or an `else if` whose predicate the arm above has already swallowed.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: switch labels compared against the subject's own case normaliser, and if/else-if chains checked for a literal an earlier arm's containment test already swallows. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X13 · Undrained process stream10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a child process that has BOTH standard streams redirected drains both — reading one to the end while the other is never read deadlocks once the child fills the unread pipe.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: ProcessStartInfo launches with both streams redirected, checked for a drain of each stream across the enclosing type. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `spawn` imported from `child_process` whose stdout and stderr are both pipes (no options, no `stdio`, or `stdio` of `'pipe'`), bound to a local that never leaves its scope, where exactly one of the two streams is read, the other never, and the child’s `close`/`exit` (or the read stream’s end) is awaited; a shell redirect in the call’s arguments or a `kill` of the child suppresses it. The same rule reads Python’s `subprocess.Popen`, Dart’s `Process.start`, Ruby’s `Open3.popen3`, and Scala’s JDK process starts (`new ProcessBuilder(…).start()` with no `redirectErrorStream`/`redirectError`/`redirectOutput`/`inheritIO`, `Runtime.getRuntime.exec`) where one of `getInputStream`/`getErrorStream` is read and the other never while `waitFor()` is called or the read stream is read to its end. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X14 · Bypassable address classification10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X16 · Unfloored truncation loop10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a walk that recurses through a JSON/XML tree handed in by its caller bounds how deep it will go — an uncapped walk lets the document's nesting choose the stack depth, and the resulting StackOverflowException cannot be caught.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that take a JSON/XML document node and call themselves with a child of it, reachable from an externally-callable member of the same type that accepts a document, checked for any depth parameter, descent counter or threaded arithmetic anywhere in the walk. On a repository with no .NET source it reads TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths and `.d.ts` not) with the same rule: a function or method with a parameter typed as a document value — `unknown`, `any`, `object`, `Record<string, unknown|any>`, a JSON alias (`JsonValue`, `JSONObject`, …) or a DOM node global the file does not rebind — that calls itself (bare, or through `this` for a method, or hands itself to a call over the value as in `value.map(walk)`) with something it took out of that value and never through an ancestor accessor such as `closest()` or `parentElement`, that is exported or reached from an exported function (a public method of the same exported class) taking such a value, and that names no depth, level, nesting, recursion, remaining or budget anywhere and threads no `+`/`-` arithmetic through a self-call. Plain JavaScript is not read: with no annotation nothing tells a parsed document from a tree the code built itself. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness6.8 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether a type's disposal matches what it OWNS — releasing what it created, leaving alone what it was handed, and not declaring a finalizer for state that has nothing unmanaged to finalize.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: every assignment to a disposable field is read to decide whether the type CREATED the value or was handed it, and the type's disposal is checked against that answer — an injected interface it disposes, a value it constructed and never releases, a finalizer on a type holding nothing unmanaged, and a disposable local whose every reference is a plain member read. A value handed to a container that disposes its contents (a parent control's `Controls` collection, a component `IContainer`) is released by that container and is not reported; generated code is out of population. On a repository with no .NET source the same ownership questions are read in JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not): a class declaring `dispose()`, `[Symbol.dispose]()` or `[Symbol.asyncDispose]()` that disposes a field it was handed through a constructor parameter typed as a repository interface or resolved by a dependency-injection container; that assigns a field only ever from `new X(…)` of a disposable class and neither releases it anywhere in the class nor names it in its disposal member or a method that member calls, nor hands it to anything else; and a `const`/`let` local built from literals only whose every reference opens a statement operating on a non-release member of it. A class is disposable when every repository declaration of its name declares or inherits a disposal member, or when it is a documented library disposable (`vscode` EventEmitter, CancellationTokenSource and Disposable; three.js geometries, materials, textures, render targets, renderers, controls and composers). The finalizer arm has no JavaScript counterpart: a class cannot declare one. Dart is read for the owned-and-never-released arm: a Flutter `State` (or a class declaring `dispose()`/`close()`) whose library-private field is written only with direct creations of a framework controller, `FocusNode`, `StreamController` or periodic `Timer` (or a `.listen(…)` into a field declared `StreamSubscription`), which nothing in the class or its library releases (`dispose`/`close`/`cancel`) and which is never handed on except as a named argument. Ruby is read for the owned-and-never-released arm and the abandoned-local arm: a class declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose instance variable is written only with a blockless core descriptor creation (`File.open`/`new`, `Tempfile`, `Dir.open`, `IO.popen`, the `socket` and `openssl` socket classes) that no method of the class closes and that is never handed on (passed, returned, stored, exposed by `attr_reader`, delegated) — a class whose superclass or mixin lies outside the repository is not judged — and a blockless creation read through and dropped (`File.open(path).read`) or held in a local that is never closed, returned, passed or stored (a `&:read` block-pass, an `autoclose: false` borrow and a `fileno` hand-over are not abandonment). PHP is read for the same two arms: a class (not a trait, and not one using a trait) declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose `private` property (or a `final` class's `protected` one) is written only with a direct core `fopen`, `tmpfile`, `popen`, `proc_open`, `fsockopen`, `stream_socket_client`/`server` or `opendir` that nothing in the class closes (`fclose`, `pclose`, `closedir`, `unset`, a reset to `null`) and that is never handed on, and a handle held in a function's local, or read through as the argument of a reader, that is never closed, returned, passed, captured or stored; a `php://` stream, `curl_init`, `SplFileObject`, `PDO` and a function the repository declares under the core name are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

`DistributedLockHandle` declares a finalizer (line 18), but nothing in the type is unmanaged: no `IntPtr`/`UIntPtr` or pointer field, no `SafeHandle`, no `HandleRef`, no `extern`/`DllImport` member and no `Marshal`/`GCHandle`/`NativeMemory` use. A finalizer can only release what the garbage collector cannot, so on a purely-managed type it releases nothing and costs something: every instance is put on the finalizer queue, survives at least one extra collection, and is then finalized on a thread that is NOT the disposing one — where the managed objects it touches may already have been finalized themselves. Delete the finalizer (and the `GC.SuppressFinalize` that exists to defuse it); if a handle is added later, wrap it in a `SafeHandle`, which brings its own correct finalization. — src/Silverback.Core/Lock/DistributedLockHandle.cs:18
`_serviceScopeFactory.CreateScope()` (line 32) creates an `IServiceScope`, and it is bound to the local `scope`, which this method only reads through and never disposes. A scope owns every scoped service resolved from it — the `DbContext`, its connection, anything registered `AddScoped` — and releases them only when the scope itself is disposed; nothing here ever does, so each scope's services stay alive until the process ends. Create it with `using var scope = …CreateScope();` (or `await using` for `CreateAsyncScope`), or, when it must outlive the method, dispose it from the owning type's `Dispose`. — src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodsLoaderService.cs:32
`_dbContext` is never created by `DbContextAsyncEnumerable` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 28). Its declared type `DbContext` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed. — src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Storage/DbContextAsyncEnumerable`1.cs:28
`_serviceScope` is never created by `DbContextAsyncEnumerable` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 29). Its declared type `IServiceScope` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed. — src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Storage/DbContextAsyncEnumerable`1.cs:29

What to do

Each finding names the value and the span that decides who owns it — the `new` that created it, or the constructor parameter that handed it over. Confirm ownership from that span, then make the disposal match it: release what this type created, leave what it was injected with to whoever created THAT, and drop a finalizer whose type holds nothing unmanaged to release.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X19 · Unrestored process-global state10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X2 · Cancellation propagation6.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether async methods accept a CancellationToken so work can be cancelled (adoption curve).

Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same question: every named async function that itself makes a request an AbortSignal can cancel (global `fetch`, axios and its file-local instances, ky, ofetch) counts, and it is compliant when its parameters or body name a signal or it hands one of its own parameters to the request as options; signatures a framework fixes (JSX event handlers, route and lifecycle exports, request-first handlers, `override`, `'use server'` modules, TanStack `mutationFn`) are exempt unless they take a signal. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

Only 124/270 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×36) — src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs:49, src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/EnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs:49, src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/ReturnValueHandlerService.cs:30, …
No CancellationToken parameter — the body observes an ambient token instead (a field or a context object), so the work does stop on cancellation, but a caller cannot cancel this call independently of the owner that created that token. (×3) — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClient.cs:199, src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/ConsumerChannel`1.cs:99, src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Consumer`1.cs:377

What to do

Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X20 · Mistyped argument guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `ArgumentNullException` tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(p))` statements controlled by an `if`, whose condition is read for a test that is true of a NON-null `p` — an emptiness test that dereferences it (`p.Count == 0`, `!p.Any()`) or a BCL predicate documented true of the empty value (`string.IsNullOrEmpty(p)`). Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X21 · Side-effecting pattern guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X22 · Contradicted release guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.

Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.

Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X25 · Inert configuration knob10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.

Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X26 · Unsynchronised callback handoff10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.

Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `foreach` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is enumerating invalidates the enumerator it is holding, so the next `MoveNext` throws `InvalidOperationException` and the remaining items are never seen.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: `foreach` statements whose body calls a structural mutator (`Add`/`Remove`/`Clear`/`Insert`/…) on the very expression the loop is enumerating. Two arms. ARM A — the source is a concrete fragile BCL collection, or a live `Keys`/`Values` view over one, and the mutator resolves to that same collection's own member; concurrent and immutable collections and arrays are outside the population by construction, since their enumerators survive a structural change. ARM B — the source is an argument-less accessor CALL on a receiver whose body is in source: the accessor must return a stored field VERBATIM and a sibling member must structurally change that same field, both read off the implementations rather than from the members' names. A mutation the loop provably exits immediately after (`break`/`return`/`throw`/`goto`), or one written inside a nested loop or a lambda, is counted and never reported. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a condition that tests a value for emptiness indexes that same value only where the test holds — an `||` written one parenthesis too far to the left leaves an index access outside the guard beside it, so the empty case the guard exists to anticipate reaches the index and throws.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: the OUTERMOST `&&`/`||` of every boolean condition, read for a symbol the condition tests for emptiness (`string.IsNullOrEmpty`/`IsNullOrWhiteSpace`, a `Length`/`Count` comparison against a literal, `Any()`, a `Length`/`Count` pattern, or a comparison against `""`) and ALSO indexes. Each `symbol[...]` access is placed by a boolean-reachability walk from the access up to the outermost connective: an access is COVERED when some enclosing step has it in the right operand and the left operand, under the truth value that step forces, proves the symbol non-empty — a recursion over `&&`/`||` whose true- and false-directions are asymmetric. A finding needs BOTH an uncovered access and a covered one on the same symbol in the same condition, which is the agreeing twin that separates a misplaced parenthesis from an unrelated length test. Bare index accesses with no emptiness test in the condition are neither counted nor reported; a non-identifier receiver and a lambda nested inside the condition are outside the population. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a decision taken once per element is taken ABOUT that element — a test inside a counted loop that reads a fixed subscript of the very collection its guarded statement indexes by the loop variable applies element zero's answer to all of them, so the elements that differ from it are all handled wrongly, and in the same direction.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every `for` statement declaring exactly ONE loop variable, and every `if` inside its body that is not under a nested loop or a lambda. A site enters the population when the `if`’s condition never mentions the loop variable while the statement it guards indexes some collection by that variable ALONE (`c[i]`; `c[i + 1]` and `c[i, j]` are outside it). A finding additionally needs the AGREEING TWIN at the same-collection grain: the condition must read THAT SAME collection at a subscript that does not move — written into the condition, or reached through a local declared BEFORE the loop, so an alias bound inside the body is not followed. Both collection expressions must be simple identifiers. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `for (let|var|const x = …; …; …)` with one declarator and a braced body, an alias followed only when it is declared before the loop in a block that encloses it and never assigned inside the loop. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X3 · Exception handling6.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether exceptions are handled rather than silently swallowed or rethrown with lost stack traces.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every catch clause counted; empty catches and bare rethrows flagged. Population is all catch clauses, not estimated. Deterministic, hard fact.

An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×7) — src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Messages/MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs:138, src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs:34, src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs:65, …

What to do

Swallowed exception (empty catch)

Do you agree with this assessment?

X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X32 · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a plugin lookup names the type it means — searching every assembly loaded into the process for a candidate whose SIMPLE name equals a string supplied at runtime, and taking the first one found, is decided by assembly LOAD ORDER rather than by this source, so the same name can resolve to a different type on the next run.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every invocation of `First`/`FirstOrDefault`/`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` whose OWN expression subtree contains both a `GetAssemblies()` call and a `GetTypes()`/`GetExportedTypes()` call — a single-element pick out of every type loaded into the process. A nested selector in the same chain sees no `GetAssemblies()` in its own subtree and is outside the population, so one lookup counts once however many links its chain has. A finding additionally needs both remaining halves: the selector must be `First`/`FirstOrDefault` (`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` reports the ambiguity rather than resolving it, and is counted and never reported), and the chain must carry an `==` comparison of `<lambda parameter>.Name` against something that is not a literal. The receiver must be a plain identifier bound by one of the chain’s own lambdas, which places `assembly.GetName().Name == "X"` outside the rule by construction. One exemption: a `.Name` test joined by `&&` to a `FullName`/`AssemblyQualifiedName` test on the same identifier is spared; joined by `||` it is not. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X4 · Structured logging7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal`/`verbose`/`silly`/`http`/`log` call on a receiver named for a logger, in a package whose own or an enclosing `package.json` declares a logger that carries values as fields (pino, pino-http, nestjs-pino, Fastify, winston, bunyan, tslog, LogTape, roarr), whose first deciding argument is a template literal with substitutions; an object-literal fields argument is stepped over, a plain string message clears the call. Python is read the same way: a `debug`/`info`/`warning`/`error`/`exception`/`critical`/`log` call on a logger in a file that imports the standard library’s `logging` or structlog (loguru, which formats at the call, is not judged), whose message is a whole f-string with a non-constant field; a `%`-formatted, `.format()`-ed or concatenated message is not convicted, as in C#. PHP is read the same way: a PSR-3 level call (`emergency`…`debug`, `log`) on a logger (`$logger`, `$this->logger`, Laravel’s `Log::`, `logger()`, `\Drupal::logger()`) in a package whose `composer.json` requires a PSR-3 logger or a framework that hands one out (psr/log, Monolog, Laravel, Symfony, Drupal, CakePHP), or a file that imports one, whose message is a double-quoted string interpolating a variable; a single-quoted message clears the call, and `sprintf` or `.` concatenation is not convicted, as in C#. Dart is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on Sentry’s structured logger (`Sentry.logger`) whose message is a whole string literal interpolating a value (`$name`, `${…}`); the `Sentry.logger.fmt` template API clears the call. Dart that logs only through loggers with one message and no fields (package:logging, package:logger, talker, dart:developer) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Ruby is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on the console gem’s `Console` (declared by a Gemfile, gemspec or Gemfile.lock, or required) or, where SemanticLogger, Ougai or dry-logger is declared or required, on a receiver named for a logger (`logger`, `@logger`, `Rails.logger`, `log`), whose first deciding argument is, as the whole argument, a double-quoted string interpolating a non-constant value (`#{…}`, `#@ivar`); a plain literal clears the call, keyword arguments are the fields, and a block, `%`-format or `+` concatenation is not convicted. Ruby that logs only through the standard Logger (Rails.logger) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Deterministic.

Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it. (×3) — src/Silverback.Integration/Diagnostics/IntegrationLoggerExtensions.cs:608, src/Silverback.Integration/Diagnostics/IntegrationLoggerExtensions.cs:634, src/Silverback.Integration/Diagnostics/IntegrationLoggerExtensions.cs:661

What to do

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging

Do you agree with this assessment?

X5 · Nullable reference types9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether nullable reference types are enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` suppression.

Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.

~0.2 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 40 suppression(s) across the 196112 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). Each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.

What to do

Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Reference — by lens

The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.

Lens	Score	Rating	Impact
Code Health	63%	Adequate — gated by D17	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture	70%	Strong	Solid.
Maturity	56%	Adequate — gated by M4	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	67%	Adequate	Acceptable, with room to improve.
Security	79%	Strong	Solid.
Event-Driven	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Performance	79%	Strong	Solid.

Unscored — 2 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.

P12 CI test-gate honesty — 6 observation(s) recorded · Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 7 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.

Not included — 43 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.

AC1 Text alternatives — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC2 Forms & labels — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC3 Page structure — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No user-facing web UI (the repo is a library/CLI/worker/headless service) — accessibility is not applicable.
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — schema-registry Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden emqx2 Error context canceled emqx1 Error context canceled mqttx-web Error context canceled postgresql Error context canceled conduktor Error context canceled kafka-2 Error context canceled haproxy Error context canceled pgadmin Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: haproxy Pulling schema-registry Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden conduktor Error context canceled haproxy Error context canceled pgadmin Error context canceled mqttx-web Error context canceled emqx1 Error context canceled postgresql Error context canceled kafka-1 Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — no web/app surface to authorize (no HTTP API or web-UI project) and no authorization code at all (no [Authorize]/policies, no imperative guard methods). Access control is therefore N/A here — this is a library/CLI, which is authorized by its CALLER, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency hygiene not measured
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — Cross-context type coupling could not be assessed — this codebase's bounded contexts are neither declared nor inferable.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — nuget: the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 57 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — The CI pipeline builds and tests but publishes no released artifact — no package publish, container push, GitHub release or deployment step. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM attest RELEASED artifacts, so there is nothing to attest here. Add them to the release pipeline when this repo starts shipping artifacts (a published package, a container image, a deployed service or a tagged release).
D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.
DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (3 signals for this style, 3 needed — the count is met but a required primary signal is absent): 27 value object(s); 4 domain event(s); its domain events are published by services or handlers — no domain entity raises one; a Domain/Aggregates/ValueObjects layer; a domain structure with no aggregate, domain event or strongly-typed id in it: a CRUD / clean-architecture model, measured but not claimed as DDD; a top-level samples/ tree: a library or framework whose examples are its consumers — these types are building blocks, not a domain
ED2 Event/command shape — no command-shaped messages detected — single-handler-per-command check not applicable
ED3 Event naming — no domain or integration events detected — event-naming check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — no outbound HTTP usage detected — no HttpClient/IHttpClientFactory/AddHttpClient in source, and no Refit/RestSharp/Flurl.Http namespace or package reference
P8 Schema migrations — EF Core is used, but the schema-migration mechanism could not be identified — this check only recognises EF migrations, so any other migration runner reads as an absence. Our limit, not a verdict on this repository.
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (Cobertura — `dotnet test --collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` with a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
S1 Web-Security Posture — No web surface detected in the analyzed source — no HTTP API or web-UI project (no controllers/minimal-API endpoints, no Razor/Blazor views) and no web middleware (HTTPS redirection, HSTS, security headers, cookies). Transport security, security headers, secure cookies, CSRF/input-validation and middleware-order controls are therefore N/A here — this is a library/CLI/worker, not a web app. Crypto hygiene was still checked and found nothing to flag. If this codebase becomes web-facing, the dimension reactivates automatically.
SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.

Critical — 181 finding(s)

D17 · Explicit Debt · AnalyzerSeverityNone · ×146

AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:27 — IDE0058 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone samples/.editorconfig:26 — IDE0058 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:26 — IDE0058 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:29 — IDE0072 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone samples/.editorconfig:28 — IDE0072 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:28 — IDE0072 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:37 — SA1309 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone samples/.editorconfig:38 — SA1309 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:36 — SA1309 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:39 — SA1408 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone samples/.editorconfig:40 — SA1408 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:38 — SA1408 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:41 — SA1413 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone samples/.editorconfig:42 — SA1413 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:40 — SA1413 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:43 — SA1500 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:42 — SA1500 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:45 — SA1503 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone samples/.editorconfig:44 — SA1503 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:44 — SA1503 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:47 — SA1513 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:46 — SA1513 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone .editorconfig:53 — CA1852 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone samples/.editorconfig:66 — CA1852 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
AnalyzerSeverityNone tests/extended/.editorconfig:66 — CA1852 — this rule is switched off for every file the section matches, in every project under this directory, and the only record that it was ever switched off is this line: nothing at the sites it would have reported says so, so a reader of that code has no reason to look here, and code added years from now inherits the decision silently. Fix what the rule reports and delete the entry, or — where some sites really are legitimate — leave the rule on and suppress it at those sites with their reasons, so it keeps protecting the rest of the tree. If the rule is genuinely unwanted here, say why — on this line after the entry, or in the comment run directly above it: a comment that only repeats the rule's own title is read as no explanation at all and leaves this row in place.
+ 121 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · FileScopedPragmaDisable · ×9

FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/BrokerStatistics.cs:8 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/ConsumerGroupStatistics.cs:7 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/ExactlyOnceSemanticsStatistics.cs:7 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/KafkaStatistics.cs:8 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/PartitionStatistics.cs:7 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/TopicPartitions.cs:7 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/TopicStatistics.cs:8 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/Statistics/WindowStatistics.cs:7 — #pragma warning disable 1591 // Will maybe document later — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.
FileScopedPragmaDisable tests/Silverback.Integration.MQTT.Tests/Messaging/Messages/MqttHeadersMappingExtensionsTests.cs:10 — #pragma warning disable CS0618 // Type or member is obsolete — the disable has no matching restore anywhere in this file, so it does not end with the construct that needed it: it runs to the end of the file and silences the rule for everything written below, including code added years later that nobody weighed against it. Close it with the matching restore directive immediately after the construct it covers — that alone turns a standing exemption into a scoped one — or fix the cause and drop the directive entirely.

D17 · Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock · ×8

EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Messages/MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs:138 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs:34 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs:65 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Core/Util/TypesCache.cs:46 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Messaging/Broker/Kafka/Mocks/MockedConfluentConsumer.cs:736 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/RawSequencerConsumerBehavior.cs:59 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/SequenceExtensions.cs:44 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
EmptyCatchBlock tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.MqttConfigProxies/ProxyClassGenerator.cs:36 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.

D17 · Explicit Debt · NoWarnInCsproj · ×5

NoWarnInCsproj Directory.Packages.props:5 — NU1507 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, including builds years from now. It is raised by the build itself — the packaging, restore or SDK step — about the project as a whole, not by the compiler or an analyzer at a line of code, so there is no call site to narrow it to and no per-site directive that could carry a reason: this element is the only place the decision can be recorded. Say WHY here, in a comment on the entry, or fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list.
NoWarnInCsproj samples/Directory.Packages.props:5 — NU1507 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, including builds years from now. It is raised by the build itself — the packaging, restore or SDK step — about the project as a whole, not by the compiler or an analyzer at a line of code, so there is no call site to narrow it to and no per-site directive that could carry a reason: this element is the only place the decision can be recorded. Say WHY here, in a comment on the entry, or fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list.
NoWarnInCsproj Directory.Build.props:25 — 1573 — this project generates an XML documentation file as a build output, so its documentation is something it PUBLISHES to whoever consumes the assembly, and this entry switches off a rule whose only job is to report that documentation missing or malformed. The two decisions sit in the same file and the quiet one wins: the documentation this project ships has holes exactly where the rule would have pointed, no build says so, and the people who meet the gap are downstream — in their editor, at the moment they are trying to use the member. Write the documentation the rule is asking for and drop the code from the list; where only some elements genuinely cannot carry it, narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rest of the API stays covered. If the documentation was never meant to be consumed, the honest fix is the other line — stop generating the file, so the project no longer publishes something it is choosing not to check.
NoWarnInCsproj Directory.Build.props:25 — 1591 — this project generates an XML documentation file as a build output, so its documentation is something it PUBLISHES to whoever consumes the assembly, and this entry switches off a rule whose only job is to report that documentation missing or malformed. The two decisions sit in the same file and the quiet one wins: the documentation this project ships has holes exactly where the rule would have pointed, no build says so, and the people who meet the gap are downstream — in their editor, at the moment they are trying to use the member. Write the documentation the rule is asking for and drop the code from the list; where only some elements genuinely cannot carry it, narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rest of the API stays covered. If the documentation was never meant to be consumed, the honest fix is the other line — stop generating the file, so the project no longer publishes something it is choosing not to check.
NoWarnInCsproj Directory.Build.props:25 — 1712 — this warning is switched off for the WHOLE project, in every file it builds, including code written years from now: nothing at the call site records that the rule was ever silenced, so the next reader has no reason to look here. Fix what the rule is reporting and drop the code from the list, or — if some occurrences really are legitimate — narrow the suppression to those sites and give each one its reason, so the rule keeps protecting the rest of the project.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

AX1 · Captive dependencies · Captive dependency · ×2

Captive dependency: singleton BrokerClientsConnector captures transient BrokerClientsBootstrapper src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs:37 — `BrokerClientsConnector` is registered as a SINGLETON but its constructor takes `BrokerClientsBootstrapper brokerClientsBootstrapper`, which is registered as Transient. The singleton captures one instance of the transient dependency forever — defeating its lifetime (a per-request DbContext shared across all requests is a classic data-corruption/threading bug). Make the singleton resolve `BrokerClientsBootstrapper` per-use (inject `IServiceScopeFactory` or a factory func), or align the lifetimes.
Captive dependency: singleton KafkaTransactionalProducerCollection captures transient IBrokerBehaviorsProvider src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaTransactionalProducerCollection.cs:41 — `KafkaTransactionalProducerCollection` is registered as a SINGLETON but its constructor takes `IBrokerBehaviorsProvider behaviorsProvider`, which is registered as Transient. The singleton captures one instance of the transient dependency forever — defeating its lifetime (a per-request DbContext shared across all requests is a classic data-corruption/threading bug). Make the singleton resolve `IBrokerBehaviorsProvider` per-use (inject `IServiceScopeFactory` or a factory func), or align the lifetimes.

D13 · Secret Scanning · Leaked secret · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D28 · Secrets (history) · High secret · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

AX3 · Project dependency cycles · Namespace dependency cycle · ×1

Namespace dependency cycle src/Silverback.Core/Configuration/SilverbackBuilder.AddBehavior.cs:14 — The namespaces Silverback.Background ↔ Silverback.Configuration ↔ Silverback.Diagnostics ↔ Silverback.Lock ↔ Silverback.Messaging ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Behaviors ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.BrokerMessageIdentifiersTracking ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Callbacks ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Callbacks.Statistics ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Kafka ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Broker.Mqtt ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Kafka ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Configuration.Mqtt ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.ErrorHandling ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.KafkaOffsetStore ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Consuming.Transaction ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Diagnostics ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Encryption ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Messages ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.EndpointResolvers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Enrichers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.Filter ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Producing.TransactionalOutbox ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Publishing ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Sequences ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Batch ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Sequences.Chunking ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Serialization ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers.ArgumentResolvers ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Subscribers.Subscriptions ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Transactions ↔ Silverback.Messaging.Validation ↔ Silverback.Storage depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Silverback.Configuration → Silverback.Diagnostics (Silverback.Configuration.SilverbackBuilder → Silverback.Diagnostics.LogLevelConfigurator, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

Serious — 198 finding(s)

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken · ×36

Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs:49 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/EnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs:49 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: HandleReturnValuesAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/ReturnValueHandlerService.cs:30 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/SingleMessageReturnValueHandler.cs:40 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: InvokeWithStreamEnumerableAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodInvoker.cs:123 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: InvokeWithActivityWithoutBlockingAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodInvoker.cs:160 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: InvokeWithActivityAsync src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodInvoker.cs:172 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ParallelForEachAsync src/Silverback.Core/Util/EnumerableForEachExtensions.cs:45 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: SelectAsync src/Silverback.Core/Util/EnumerableSelectExtensions.cs:31 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ReadAllAsync src/Silverback.Core/Util/StreamExtensions.cs:12 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ReadAsync src/Silverback.Core/Util/StreamExtensions.cs:38 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Core.Rx/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/ObservableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs:45 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: PublishDomainEventsAsync src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/DomainEventsPublisher.cs:79 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: PublishDomainEventsAsync src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/DomainEventsPublisher.cs:87 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: HandleAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/BinaryMessages/BinaryMessageHandlerConsumerBehavior.cs:34 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ConnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClient.cs:77 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ReconnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClient.cs:115 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DisposeCoreAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClient.cs:144 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DisconnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClient.cs:167 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: InitializeAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs:50 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: StopConsumersAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs:104 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DisconnectAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs:112 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: InitializeCoreAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnector.cs:131 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ShutdownAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnectorService.cs:70 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: InvokeAsync src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvoker.cs:57 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
+ 11 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×15

TodoComment src/Silverback.Core.Rx/Messaging/Subscribers/MessageStreamObservable`1.cs:35 — // TODO: Cancellation? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Testing/KafkaTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs:56 — // TODO: Map other settings (e.g. encryption) — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT.Testing/Testing/MqttTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs:53 — // TODO: Map other settings (e.g. encryption) — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Testing/KafkaTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs:59 — // TODO: Test all cases — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT.Testing/Testing/MqttTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs:85 — // TODO: Test all cases — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Kafka/ChunkingTests.Batch.cs:401 — // TODO: Chunking_ShouldAbortSequence_WhenDisconnectingWhileJsonConsumedInBatch() => throw new NotImplementedException(); — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Kafka/ChunkingTests.Batch.cs:402 — // TODO: Chunking_ShouldAbortSequence_WhenDisconnectingWhileBinaryMessageConsumedInBatch() => throw new NotImplementedException(); — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Kafka/ChunkingTests.Batch.cs:403 — // TODO: Chunking_ShouldAbortSequence_WhenDeserializationFailsWhileJsonConsumedInBatch() (Test different error kinds (deserialization, processing, etc.) -> error mid batch, all sequences aborted and disposed?) — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Kafka/ChunkingTests.Batch.cs:404 — // TODO: Chunking_ShouldAbortSequence_WhenProcessingFailsWhileJsonConsumedInBatch() (Test different error kinds (deserialization, processing, etc.) -> error mid batch, all sequences aborted and disposed?) — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Kafka/ChunkingTests.Batch.cs:405 — // TODO: Chunking_ShouldAbortSequence_WhenProcessingFailsWhileBinaryMessageConsumedInBatch() (Test different error kinds (deserialization, processing, etc.) -> error mid batch, all sequences aborted and disposed?) — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Kafka/ErrorPoliciesTests.cs:16 — // TODO: Test rollback always called with all kind of policies — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Mqtt/ErrorPoliciesTests.cs:16 — // TODO: Test rollback always called with all kind of policies — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E/Mqtt/HealthCheckTests.cs:51 — // TODO: Test unhealthy case — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Storage.Memory.Tests/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/InMemoryOutboxReaderTests.cs:213 — // TODO: Revert assert to >=100 and figure out why it fails in the pipeline — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment tests/Silverback.Tests.Common/TestingCollection`1.cs:10 — // TODO: Use in E2E tests — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.

D17 · Explicit Debt · CoverageExclusion · ×15

CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Publishing/UnhandledMessageException.cs:13 — class UnhandledMessageException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodInvocationException.cs:14 — class SubscribedMethodInvocationException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Core/SilverbackConfigurationException.cs:12 — class SilverbackConfigurationException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Core/SilverbackException.cs:12 — class SilverbackException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/MissingKafkaTransactionException.cs:12 — class MissingKafkaTransactionException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttConnectException.cs:13 — class MqttConnectException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttProduceException.cs:13 — class MqttProduceException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbackInvocationException.cs:12 — class BrokerClientCallbackInvocationException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/ProduceException.cs:13 — class ProduceException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Configuration/BrokerConfigurationException.cs:12 — class BrokerConfigurationException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Diagnostics/ConsumerPipelineFatalException.cs:13 — class ConsumerPipelineFatalException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/RoutingException.cs:12 — class RoutingException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/SequenceException.cs:13 — class SequenceException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Serialization/MessageSerializerException.cs:15 — class MessageSerializerException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.
CoverageExclusion src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Validation/MessageValidationException.cs:13 — class MessageValidationException — this shipped code is lifted out of the coverage measurement, so it is not that the code is reported as untested: it is not reported at all. The excluded lines leave the denominator, which means the percentage the team publishes goes UP when code stops being covered, and the gap is invisible in the artefact that would otherwise disclose it. Nothing here is written by a compiler or a build — the attribute is only ever typed by an author — so it is a standing decision, and the only record of it is this line. Test what it covers and delete the attribute; where the code genuinely cannot be exercised (a debugger display, a platform branch this build cannot reach), narrow the exclusion to the smallest declaration that is really untestable rather than the type around it, so members added later are not silently excluded too. If it is correct as it stands, say why — in the attribute's own Justification, or in a comment above it: that is what turns it from unexplained debt into a recorded decision, and it clears this row.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×8

TooManyMethods: KafkaClientsConfigurationBuilder src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaClientsConfigurationBuilder.cs — TooManyMethods — 165 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 107 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 77 over it, 3.57× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: KafkaClientConfigurationBuilder src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaClientConfigurationBuilder`1.cs — TooManyMethods — 137 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 102 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 72 over it, 3.40× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: SilverbackBuilder src/Silverback.Core/Configuration/SilverbackBuilder.AddSubscriber.cs — TooManyMethods — 371 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 68 methods, declared across 6 files: Configuration/SilverbackBuilder.AddSubscriber.cs (28), Configuration/SilverbackBuilder.AddDelegateSubscriber.cs (26), Configuration/SilverbackBuilder.AddBehavior.cs (10), Configuration/SilverbackBuilder.HandleMessageOfType.cs (2), +2 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 38 over it, 2.27× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: KafkaConsumerConfigurationBuilder src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaConsumerConfigurationBuilder.cs — TooManyMethods — 159 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 58 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 28 over it, 1.93× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: MqttClientConfigurationBuilder REDACTED — TooManyMethods — 288 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 54 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 24 over it, 1.80× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: MqttClientsConfigurationBuilder src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Configuration/Mqtt/MqttClientsConfigurationBuilder.cs — TooManyMethods — 167 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 45 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 15 over it, 1.50× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: KafkaProducerConfigurationBuilder src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaProducerConfigurationBuilder.cs — TooManyMethods — 107 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 37 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 7 over it, 1.23× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: MqttProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilder src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Configuration/Mqtt/MqttProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilder`1.cs — TooManyMethods — 134 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 34 methods, declared across 4 files: Mqtt/MqttProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilder`1.CorrelationData.cs (12), Mqtt/MqttProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilder`1.cs (12), Mqtt/MqttProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilder`1.ResponseTopic.cs (6), Mqtt/MqttProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilder`1.QoS.cs (4). The bar is 30 methods; this is 4 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene · Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) · ×7

Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Core/Background/RecurringDistributedBackgroundService.cs:65 — `await using … = lockHandle` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`.
Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/DefaultProduceStrategy.cs:111 — `await foreach (… in envelopes.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`.
Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:154 — `await foreach (… in envelopes.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`.
Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.Memory/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/InMemoryOutboxWriter.cs:76 — `await foreach (… in outboxMessages.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`.
Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:153 — `await foreach (… in items.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`.
Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/EntityFrameworkOutboxReader.cs:90 — `await dbContext.Set<SilverbackOutboxMessage>() .AsNoTracking() .DefaultIfEmpty() .M...` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`.
Awaits without ConfigureAwait(false) src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/EntityFrameworkOutboxWriter.cs:87 — `await foreach (… in outboxMessages.WithCancellation(cancellationToken))` resumes on the caller's captured context. In library code that context belongs to the host application, so a host that blocks on this call (or runs on a UI thread) can stall or deadlock — append `.ConfigureAwait(false)`.

X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×7

Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Messages/MessageStreamEnumerable`1.cs:138 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs:34 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.CancelOnExceptionAsync.cs:65 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TypesCache.cs:46 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/RawSequencerConsumerBehavior.cs:59 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/SequenceExtensions.cs:44 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.MqttConfigProxies/ProxyClassGenerator.cs:36 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking · ×6

Sync-over-async blocking — 5 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:17 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:26 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:35 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:42 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:44 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

AX2 · Stateful singletons · Stateful singleton · ×4

Stateful singleton: SubscribedMethodsCache src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodsCache.cs:15 — `SubscribedMethodsCache` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_subscribedMethods, _hasAnyMessageStreamSubscriber; e.g. `_subscribedMethods` at line 109).
Stateful singleton: ObservableStreamMessageArgumentResolver src/Silverback.Core.Rx/Messaging/Subscribers/ArgumentResolvers/ObservableStreamMessageArgumentResolver.cs:17 — `ObservableStreamMessageArgumentResolver` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_createObservableMethodInfo; e.g. `_createObservableMethodInfo` at line 51).
Stateful singleton: BrokerClientCallbacksInvoker src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvoker.cs:16 — `BrokerClientCallbacksInvoker` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_callbackTypes; e.g. `_callbackTypes` at line 195).
Stateful singleton: BrokerClientsConnectorService src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/BrokerClientsConnectorService.cs:14 — `BrokerClientsConnectorService` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_stoppingTask; e.g. `_stoppingTask` at line 68).

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:134 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:134-139 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:161-166 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:134` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:77 — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:77-82 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:100-105 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:83` calls `AppendLine` and `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:106` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistryDeserializerBuilder`1.cs:86 — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistryDeserializerBuilder`1.cs:86-91 | src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistrySerializerBuilder`1.cs:86-91 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistryDeserializerBuilder`1.cs` and `src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistrySerializerBuilder`1.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 85% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistryDeserializerBuilder`1.cs:108 — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistryDeserializerBuilder`1.cs:108-113 | src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistrySerializerBuilder`1.cs:108-113 — before extracting anything, compare `src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistryDeserializerBuilder`1.cs` and `src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/SchemaRegistrySerializerBuilder`1.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 85% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

P12 · CI test-gate honesty · CI test gate excludes suites by filter · ×4

CI test gate excludes suites by filter azure-pipelines.sonar.yml:34 — `dotnet test Silverback.sln --configuration $(buildConfiguration) --no-build --verbosity Normal --logger trx --filter "Type…` filters with `Type!=E2E&Dependency!=Docker&CI!=Skip` — 11 test(s) it drops — run by no other gate before merge (e.g. OffsetStoreEntityFrameworkTests.OffsetStore_ShouldUseTransaction_WhenUsingPostgreSql, OffsetStorePostgreSqlTests.OffsetStore_ShouldStoreSubscribedTopicsOffsets). Run what it drops in another job before merge (a complementary filter), or remove the filter.
CI test gate excludes suites by filter azure-pipelines.sonar.yml:46 — `dotnet test Silverback.sln --configuration $(buildConfiguration) --no-build --verbosity Normal --logger trx --filter "Type…` filters with `Type=E2E&Dependency!=Docker&CI!=Skip` — 11 test(s) it drops — run by no other gate before merge (e.g. OffsetStoreEntityFrameworkTests.OffsetStore_ShouldUseTransaction_WhenUsingPostgreSql, OffsetStorePostgreSqlTests.OffsetStore_ShouldStoreSubscribedTopicsOffsets). Run what it drops in another job before merge (a complementary filter), or remove the filter.
CI test gate excludes suites by filter azure-pipelines.yml:21 — `dotnet test Silverback.sln --configuration $(buildConfiguration) --no-build --verbosity Normal --logger trx --filter "Type…` filters with `Type!=E2E&Dependency!=Docker&CI!=Skip` — 11 test(s) it drops — run by no other gate before merge (e.g. OffsetStoreEntityFrameworkTests.OffsetStore_ShouldUseTransaction_WhenUsingPostgreSql, OffsetStorePostgreSqlTests.OffsetStore_ShouldStoreSubscribedTopicsOffsets). Run what it drops in another job before merge (a complementary filter), or remove the filter.
CI test gate excludes suites by filter azure-pipelines.yml:29 — `dotnet test Silverback.sln --configuration $(buildConfiguration) --no-build --verbosity Normal --logger trx --filter "Type…` filters with `Type=E2E&Dependency!=Docker&CI!=Skip` — 11 test(s) it drops — run by no other gate before merge (e.g. OffsetStoreEntityFrameworkTests.OffsetStore_ShouldUseTransaction_WhenUsingPostgreSql, OffsetStorePostgreSqlTests.OffsetStore_ShouldStoreSubscribedTopicsOffsets). Run what it drops in another job before merge (a complementary filter), or remove the filter.

X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) · ×4

Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:17 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:26 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:35 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) src/Silverback.Core/Util/TaskExtensions.SafeWait.cs:44 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×3

MethodTooLong: DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForClientConfig tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs:52 — MethodTooLong — AppendSummaryForClientConfig runs 336 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 236 over it, 3.36× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForConsumerConfig tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs:393 — MethodTooLong — AppendSummaryForConsumerConfig runs 112 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 12 over it, 1.12× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForProducerConfig tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs:510 — MethodTooLong — AppendSummaryForProducerConfig runs 105 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 5 over it, 1.05× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:421 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:421-439 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:645-663 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:421` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:479 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:479-497 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:703-721 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:479` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/DefaultProduceStrategy.cs:70 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/DefaultProduceStrategy.cs:70-88 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/DefaultProduceStrategy.cs:113-131 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/DefaultProduceStrategy.cs:70` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:129 — src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:129-138 | src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:161-170 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:129` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:117 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:117-126 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:144-153 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/OutboxProduceStrategy.cs:117` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Consuming/KafkaOffsetStore/PostgreSqlKafkaOffsetStore.cs:47 — src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Consuming/KafkaOffsetStore/PostgreSqlKafkaOffsetStore.cs:47-56 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Consuming/KafkaOffsetStore/SqliteKafkaOffsetStore.cs:45-54 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs:29 — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs:29-39 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/SchemaRegistryBuilderGenerator.cs:24-34 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs:29` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxReader.cs:105 — src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxReader.cs:105-115 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/SqliteOutboxReader.cs:109-119 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxReader.cs:91 — src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxReader.cs:91-101 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/SqliteOutboxReader.cs:95-105 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

ED5 · Idempotency · Non-idempotent mutation · ×3

Non-idempotent mutation: ReturnValueHandlers.AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.Handle src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/ReturnValueHandlers/AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.cs:40 — `ReturnValueHandlers.AsyncEnumerableMessagesReturnValueHandler.Handle` mutates persistent state (an event publish) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write.
Non-idempotent mutation: Producer.ProducerBackgroundService.ExecuteAsync samples/Kafka/Avro.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:32 — `Producer.ProducerBackgroundService.ExecuteAsync` mutates persistent state (an event publish one hop away, in ProducerBackgroundService.ProduceMessageAsync) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write.
Non-idempotent mutation: Producer.ProducerBackgroundService.ExecuteAsync samples/Kafka/JsonSchemaRegistry.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:31 — `Producer.ProducerBackgroundService.ExecuteAsync` mutates persistent state (an event publish one hop away, in ProducerBackgroundService.ProduceMessageAsync) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Repeated repair · ×2

Repeated repair: src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttClientWrapper.cs src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttClientWrapper.cs:181 — src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttClientWrapper.cs changed 3 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 9 (its worst body is MqttClientWrapper.TryConnectAsync at line 181), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix: prevent message acceptance during MQTT disconnection to avoid stalling”; “fix: prevent MQTT consumers from stalling after unexpected connection loss and improve disconnection handling”; “fix: ensure MQTT messages are published before shutdown and prevent stalling of publishing calls”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-28..2026-09-26, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-28 17:31:19 +02:00' --until='2026-09-26 17:31:19 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/Mqtt/MqttClientWrapper.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Repeated repair: src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/MqttConsumer.cs src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/MqttConsumer.cs:97 — src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/MqttConsumer.cs changed 3 times in last 90 days and 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, so repair is the majority of this file's churn. Its max cyclomatic complexity is 6 (its worst body is MqttConsumer.HandleMessageAsync at line 97), UNDER the 15 threshold, so this is deliberately not filed as a churn × complexity hotspot — the difficulty here is in the behaviour the file has to get right, not in its control flow, and refactoring it for complexity would be the wrong move. The repairs counted were: “fix: prevent MQTT consumers from stalling after unexpected connection loss and improve disconnection handling”; “fix: prevent mqtt consumer to stall during reconnect and fix uneven messages distribution across channels”; “fix: prevent stale Kafka processing from affecting new assignments”. Each one is a case this code did not handle. Before the next change lands here, check that every one of them is pinned by a test that fails without its fix; where the same area keeps coming back, the durable fix is usually at the interface that keeps being misused rather than at the line that was last corrected. Counted over 2026-06-28..2026-09-26, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-28 17:31:19 +02:00' --until='2026-09-26 17:31:19 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Messaging/Broker/MqttConsumer.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×2

FileTooLong: styles/lunr.js docs/v4/styles/lunr.js — FileTooLong — 1135 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 635 over it, 2.27× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs — FileTooLong — 631 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 131 over it, 1.26× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.

D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×2

ClassTooLong: DocumentationProvider tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs — ClassTooLong — 625 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 6 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 225 over it, 1.56× the bar. The type holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group its members by. To reduce it, split it by area instead: give each cohesive family of members its own smaller type, so no one type has to be read whole to change one of them.
ClassTooLong: MessageWrapper src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs — ClassTooLong — 490 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 16 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 90 over it, 1.23× the bar. The type holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group its members by. To reduce it, split it by area instead: give each cohesive family of members its own smaller type, so no one type has to be read whole to change one of them.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:101 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:101-118 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:310-327 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:534-551 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:101` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:150 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:150-167 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:365-382 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:589-606 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:150` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:179 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:179-195 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:232-248 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:179` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:202 — src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:202-218 | src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:255-271 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:202` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Producer.cs:320 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Producer.cs:320-334 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/Producer.cs:342-356 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:230 — src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:230-244 | src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:283-297 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Storage/DataAccess/DataAccess`3.cs:230` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:155 — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:155-162 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:171-178 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:155` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:179` calls `MustBeInternal` and `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:164` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Messaging/Serialization/NewtonsoftJsonMessageDeserializer`1.cs:126 — src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Messaging/Serialization/NewtonsoftJsonMessageDeserializer`1.cs:126-133 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Serialization/JsonMessageDeserializer`1.cs:101-108 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (30 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (30 lines × 2) samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:40 — samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:40-69 | samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService2.cs:40-69 — before extracting anything, compare `samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs` and `samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService2.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 83% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (30 lines × 2) samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Startup.cs:11 — samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Startup.cs:11-40 | samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Startup.cs:11-42 — before extracting anything, compare `samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Startup.cs` and `samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Startup.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 88% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Skipped test marks a known-real bug · ×2

Skipped test marks a known-real bug tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvokerTests.cs:126 — A test is skipped with reason "TODO: Check why this was the expected behavior" — the behavior it asserts is UNVERIFIED and this skip is likely the only marker of a real bug. It ages invisibly: fix the flakiness or track the bug somewhere that can't be forgotten.
Skipped test marks a known-real bug tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvokerTests.cs:279 — A test is skipped with reason "TODO: Check why this was the expected behavior" — the behavior it asserts is UNVERIFIED and this skip is likely the only marker of a real bug. It ages invisibly: fix the flakiness or track the bug somewhere that can't be forgotten.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Disposes a dependency it does not own · ×2

Disposes a dependency it does not own src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Storage/DbContextAsyncEnumerable`1.cs:28 — `_dbContext` is never created by `DbContextAsyncEnumerable` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 28). Its declared type `DbContext` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed.
Disposes a dependency it does not own src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Storage/DbContextAsyncEnumerable`1.cs:29 — `_serviceScope` is never created by `DbContextAsyncEnumerable` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 29). Its declared type `IServiceScope` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cyclomatic 22) · ×1

lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cyclomatic 22) docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1227 — lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D10 · Test Quality · Fixed-sleep synchronisation · ×1

Fixed-sleep synchronisation: Commit_ShouldRespectGroupMembership_WithStaticAssignment tests/extended/Silverback.Tests.Extended.Integration/Kafka/StaticAssignmentTests.cs:36 — This test starts a background task and then orders itself against it with `Task.Delay(1000)` — a fixed wait, not a signal that the work is done. Whether it passes depends on how loaded the machine is, which is why a test written this way is green on a developer's box and random in CI. Wait for the event itself instead: the process's own exit or output, a completion handle, or a condition polled to a timeout.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×1

Hotspot: src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cs src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cs:354 — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cs changed 6 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 15 in KafkaConsumer.RollbackCoreAsync at line 354. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 3 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-28..2026-09-26, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-28 17:31:19 +02:00' --until='2026-09-26 17:31:19 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D17 · Explicit Debt · BareSuppressMessage repeated across 51 files · ×1

BareSuppressMessage repeated across 51 files src/Silverback.Core/AsyncEvent`1.cs:67 — The identical BareSuppressMessage (`SuppressMessage`) appears in 51 files (92 occurrences) — a single repo-wide policy (e.g. a Directory.Build.props decision or an idiomatic suppression), not 92 independent debts. Decide it once centrally rather than file-by-file. (Every occurrence still counts toward the score and metrics.)

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cognitive 57) · ×1

lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString (cognitive 57) docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1227 — lunr.lunr.TokenSet.fromFuzzyString has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (52 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (nesting depth added 26). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · lunr.lunr.Index.query (cognitive 34) · ×1

lunr.lunr.Index.query (cognitive 34) docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1752 — lunr.lunr.Index.query has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (18 pts), loops 6 (16 pts) (nesting depth added 21). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · lunr.lunr.Builder.add (cognitive 23) · ×1

lunr.lunr.Builder.add (cognitive 23) docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:2104 — lunr.lunr.Builder.add has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (13 pts), loops 4 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 15). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · lunr.lunr.TokenSet.intersect (cognitive 19) · ×1

lunr.lunr.TokenSet.intersect (cognitive 19) docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:1498 — lunr.lunr.TokenSet.intersect has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (10 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 10). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · lunr.lunr.QueryLexer.lexText (cognitive 19) · ×1

lunr.lunr.QueryLexer.lexText (cognitive 19) docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:2649 — lunr.lunr.QueryLexer.lexText has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · lunr.lunr.MatchData.combine (cognitive 16) · ×1

lunr.lunr.MatchData.combine (cognitive 16) docs/v4/styles/lunr.js:2335 — lunr.lunr.MatchData.combine has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (10 pts), loops 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 9). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (11 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (11 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:196 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:196-211 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:247-264 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:393-411 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:465-480 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:516-533 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:601-617 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:660-678 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:732-747 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:783-800 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:868-884 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:927-945 — These 11 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 11 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 11 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (6 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:80 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:80-119 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:129-168 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:178-220 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:231-273 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:282-327 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:337-382 — These 6 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 6 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 6 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:85 — src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:85-109 | src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:116-140 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/SqliteOutboxWriter.cs:84-108 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/SqliteOutboxWriter.cs:115-139 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (29–30 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (29–30 lines × 2) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:48 — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:48-77 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/SchemaRegistryBuilderGenerator.cs:25-53 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/SchemaRegistryBuilderGenerator.cs:53` calls `AppendLine` and `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:77` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (24 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (24 lines × 4) src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:86 — src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:86-109 | src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:117-140 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/SqliteOutboxWriter.cs:85-108 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/SqliteOutboxWriter.cs:116-139 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: the declarations holding them bind `outboxMessages` to `IEnumerable<OutboxMessage>` in one and `IAsyncEnumerable<OutboxMessage>` in another, and the duplicated lines use it. The extracted unit therefore needs a parameter type that fits BOTH — their common supertype where they have one, or a new abstraction over them where they do not — and settling that is the step that comes BEFORE the extraction above. Where the two types are deliberately unrelated, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:507 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:507-527 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:562-582 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:507` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:283 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:283-302 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:338-357 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:283` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:393 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:393-408 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:451-466 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:393` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (17 lines × 3) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:395 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:395-411 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:662-678 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:929-945 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:395` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 5) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 5) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:252 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:252-264 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:521-533 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:605-617 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:788-800 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:872-884 — all 5 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:252` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:248` calls `NotNull`, `nameof` and `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:601` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ProxyClassGenerator.cs:55 — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ProxyClassGenerator.cs:55-68 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/SchemaRegistryProxyClassGenerator.cs:28-41 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ProxyClassGenerator.cs:55` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 8) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 8) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:252 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:252-260 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:398-406 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:521-529 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:605-613 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:665-673 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:788-796 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:872-880 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:932-940 — all 8 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:252` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:248` calls `NotNull`, `nameof` and `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:601` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:197 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:197-211 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:466-480 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:733-747 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 11) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 11) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:200 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:200-208 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:252-260 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:398-406 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:469-477 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:521-529 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:605-613 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:665-673 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:736-744 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:788-796 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:872-880 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:932-940 — all 11 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:200` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:248` calls `NotNull`, `nameof` and `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisherExtensions.cs:601` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:81 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:81-93 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:130-142 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:81` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:83 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:83-94 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:132-143 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:292-303 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:347-358 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:83` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Domain/EntityFrameworkDomainEventsPublisher`1.cs:97 — src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Domain/EntityFrameworkDomainEventsPublisher`1.cs:97-108 | src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Domain/EntityFrameworkDomainEventsPublisher`1.cs:155-166 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Messaging/Serialization/NewtonsoftJsonMessageSerializer.cs:62 — src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Messaging/Serialization/NewtonsoftJsonMessageSerializer.cs:62-72 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/BinaryMessages/BinaryMessageSerializer.cs:21-31 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Serialization/JsonMessageSerializer.cs:50-60 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–12 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–12 lines × 3) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:49 — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:49-60 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:51-61 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/SchemaRegistryBuilderGenerator.cs:26-37 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:49` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentBuilderGenerator.cs:63` calls `nameof`, `AppendLine` and `tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/BuilderGenerator.cs:62` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 4) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:81 — src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:81-90 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:130-139 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:182-191 | src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:235-244 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:81` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:180` calls `Select`, `Invoke` and `src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Producing/Routing/MessageWrapper.cs:80` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/ProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilderSchemaRegistryExtensions.cs:56 — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/ProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilderSchemaRegistryExtensions.cs:56-63 | src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/ProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilderSchemaRegistryExtensions.cs:103-110 | src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/ProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilderSchemaRegistryExtensions.cs:150-157 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Messaging/Configuration/ProducerEndpointConfigurationBuilderSchemaRegistryExtensions.cs:56` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it — the window is that declaration's tail, not a fragment that begins part-way through something, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs:44 — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs:44-50 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ProxyClassGenerator.cs:62-68 | tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/SchemaRegistryProxyClassGenerator.cs:35-41 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (26 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (26 lines × 2) src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:53 — src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/PostgreSqlOutboxWriter.cs:53-78 | src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Producing/TransactionalOutbox/SqliteOutboxWriter.cs:52-77 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/Subscribers/BinaryFileSubscriber.cs:22 — samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/Subscribers/BinaryFileSubscriber.cs:22-44 | samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/Subscribers/BinaryFileSubscriber.cs:22-44 — before extracting anything, compare `samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/Subscribers/BinaryFileSubscriber.cs` and `samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/Subscribers/BinaryFileSubscriber.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 93% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 20) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 20) samples/Kafka/Avro.Consumer/Program.cs:9 — samples/Kafka/Avro.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/Avro.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/Basic.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/Batch.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/Batch.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/BatchWithTombstone.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/BatchWithTombstone.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/JsonSchemaRegistry.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/JsonSchemaRegistry.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/MQTT/Basic.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/MQTT/Basic.ConsumerV3/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/MQTT/Basic.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/MQTT/Basic.ProducerV3/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/Program.cs:9-15 | samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Program.cs:9-15 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 20 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 20 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (49 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (49 lines × 2) samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Controllers/ProducerController.cs:21 — samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Controllers/ProducerController.cs:21-69 | samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Controllers/ProducerController.cs:21-69 — before extracting anything, compare `samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Controllers/ProducerController.cs` and `samples/MQTT/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/Controllers/ProducerController.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 95% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:27 — samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:27-35 | samples/MQTT/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:27-35 | samples/MQTT/Basic.ProducerV3/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:27-35 — before extracting anything, compare `samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs` and `samples/MQTT/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 93% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (15 lines × 4) samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:39 — samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:39-53 | samples/Kafka/JsonSchemaRegistry.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:54-68 | samples/MQTT/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:39-53 | samples/MQTT/Basic.ProducerV3/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:39-53 — `samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs` and `samples/Kafka/JsonSchemaRegistry.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 1 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 15 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:28 — samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs:28-36 | samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService2.cs:28-36 — before extracting anything, compare `samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService.cs` and `samples/Kafka/TransactionalProducer.Producer/ProducerBackgroundService2.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 83% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D5 · Coupling · Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft · ×1

Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft.csproj:1 — Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft has instability 0.25 with 3 dependents.

D5 · Coupling · Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing · ×1

Unstable project Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing.csproj:1 — Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing has instability 0.60 with 2 dependents.

D5 · Coupling · Unstable project Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql · ×1

Unstable project Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql.csproj:1 — Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql has instability 0.67 with 2 dependents.

D8 · Code Coverage · Coverage not measured · ×1

Coverage not measured — no coverage collector is wired up — Coverage NOT MEASURED: `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` names a data collector that ships in the `coverlet.collector` package, and this repository wires up none — no test project references it and no runsettings declares one. The absence of coverage here is therefore not evidence about the suite or about our analyzer environment: without a collector, `--collect` produces nothing even from a suite that builds and passes. Add a `coverlet.collector` PackageReference to the test project(s) (or commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI produces) and real coverage will be measured. It is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero defect.

P12 · CI test-gate honesty · Test project never run by CI · ×1

Test project never run by CI tests/Silverback.Core.EfCore30.Tests/Silverback.Core.EFCore30.Tests.csproj:1 — `tests/Silverback.Core.EfCore30.Tests/Silverback.Core.EFCore30.Tests.csproj` declares 29 test(s), but no CI command runs it — it is not in the solution the pipeline tests and no step names it, so its tests gate nothing. Add it to the solution (or a test step), or delete it.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Finalizer on a type that owns no unmanaged resource · ×1

Finalizer on a type that owns no unmanaged resource src/Silverback.Core/Lock/DistributedLockHandle.cs:18 — `DistributedLockHandle` declares a finalizer (line 18), but nothing in the type is unmanaged: no `IntPtr`/`UIntPtr` or pointer field, no `SafeHandle`, no `HandleRef`, no `extern`/`DllImport` member and no `Marshal`/`GCHandle`/`NativeMemory` use. A finalizer can only release what the garbage collector cannot, so on a purely-managed type it releases nothing and costs something: every instance is put on the finalizer queue, survives at least one extra collection, and is then finalized on a thread that is NOT the disposing one — where the managed objects it touches may already have been finalized themselves. Delete the finalizer (and the `GC.SuppressFinalize` that exists to defuse it); if a handle is added later, wrap it in a `SafeHandle`, which brings its own correct finalization.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · DI scope created and never disposed · ×1

DI scope created and never disposed src/Silverback.Core/Messaging/Subscribers/SubscribedMethodsLoaderService.cs:32 — `_serviceScopeFactory.CreateScope()` (line 32) creates an `IServiceScope`, and it is bound to the local `scope`, which this method only reads through and never disposes. A scope owns every scoped service resolved from it — the `DbContext`, its connection, anything registered `AddScoped` — and releases them only when the scope itself is disposed; nothing here ever does, so each scope's services stay alive until the process ends. Create it with `using var scope = …CreateScope();` (or `await using` for `CreateAsyncScope`), or, when it must outlive the method, dispose it from the owning type's `Dispose`.

Minor — 36 finding(s)

X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×7

Duplicated predicate src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaConsumerConfiguration.cs:208 — `Endpoints == null || Endpoints.Count == 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaConsumerConfiguration.cs, src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Configuration/Kafka/KafkaProducerConfiguration.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Subscribers/ConsumerNameFilterAttribute.cs:34 — `MessageIsFromAllowedGroups(message) || message is IMessageStreamProvider` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Subscribers/KafkaGroupIdFilterAttribute.cs, src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Subscribers/ConsumerNameFilterAttribute.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Silverback.Integration.Testing/Testing/TestingHelper`1.GetConsumer.cs:38 — `configuration.RawName == endpointName || configuration.FriendlyName == endpointName` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Silverback.Integration.Testing/Testing/TestingHelper`1.GetConsumer.cs, src/Silverback.Integration.Testing/Testing/TestingHelper`1.GetProducer.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs:46 — `property.Name.EndsWith("Url") && property.PropertyType == typeof(string)` appears character-identically in 3 files — tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ParentProxyClassGenerator.cs, tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/ProxyClassGenerator.cs, tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/SchemaRegistryProxyClassGenerator.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Silverback.Storage.Memory/Messaging/Configuration/BrokerOptionsBuilderMemoryExtensions.Outbox.cs:36 — `readerFactory == null || writerFactory == null` appears character-identically in 4 files — src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Messaging/Configuration/BrokerOptionsBuilderEntityFrameworkExtensions.Outbox.cs, src/Silverback.Storage.Memory/Messaging/Configuration/BrokerOptionsBuilderMemoryExtensions.Outbox.cs, src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Messaging/Configuration/BrokerOptionsBuilderPostgreSqlExtensions.Outbox.cs, src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Messaging/Configuration/BrokerOptionsBuilderSqliteExtensions.Outbox.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Testing/KafkaTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs:48 — `tuple.EndpointConfiguration.RawName == endpointName || tuple.EndpointConfiguration.FriendlyName == endpointName` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing/Testing/KafkaTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs, src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT.Testing/Testing/MqttTestingHelper.GetProducer.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Serialization/JsonMessageDeserializer`1.cs:44 — `typeof(TMessage) == typeof(object) || typeof(TMessage).IsInterface` appears character-identically in 2 files — src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Messaging/Serialization/NewtonsoftJsonMessageDeserializer`1.cs, src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Serialization/JsonMessageDeserializer`1.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.

D27 · Navigability · Pass-through layer · ×6

Pass-through layer src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Publishing/ApplicationPublisher.Command.cs:10 — ApplicationPublisher: all 6 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to _publisher and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call _publisher directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Publishing/ApplicationPublisher.Query.cs:10 — ApplicationPublisher: all 3 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to _publisher and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call _publisher directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Configuration/ErrorPolicyBuilder.cs:9 — ErrorPolicyBuilder: all 6 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to _chainBuilder and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call _chainBuilder directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisher.Sync.cs:12 — IntegrationPublisher: all 17 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to _publisher and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call _publisher directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IntegrationPublisher.cs:13 — IntegrationPublisher: all 18 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to _publisher and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call _publisher directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Messaging/Broker/KafkaConsumer.cs:24 — KafkaConsumer: all 4 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to Client and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call Client directly, or give the layer a job.

AX6 · Interface segregation · Fat interface · ×4

Fat interface: IProducer (19 members) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Broker/IProducer.cs:17 — `IProducer` declares 19 members under just 7 distinct name(s): `Name`, `DisplayName`, `EndpointConfiguration`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `Produce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `RawProduce`, `ProduceAsync`, `ProduceAsync`, `RawProduceAsync`, `RawProduceAsync`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. That is an OVERLOAD SET, not 19 separate responsibilities: a caller binds to 7 operation(s) and uses the overload it selected, so the Interface-Segregation harm does NOT apply on the caller's side and splitting this into role-interfaces would scatter one operation without relieving anything. The burden that does remain is the IMPLEMENTER's — all 19 signatures must be written and kept in step. Reduce it by collapsing overloads (optional or default parameters, or an options object) rather than by segregating the interface.
Fat interface: IIntegrationPublisher (35 members) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Publishing/IIntegrationPublisher.cs:15 — `IIntegrationPublisher` declares 35 members under just 4 distinct name(s): `WrapAndPublishAsync`, `WrapAndPublishAsync`, `WrapAndPublishAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublishBatchAsync`, `WrapAndPublish`, `WrapAndPublish`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`, `WrapAndPublishBatch`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. That is an OVERLOAD SET, not 35 separate responsibilities: a caller binds to 4 operation(s) and uses the overload it selected, so the Interface-Segregation harm does NOT apply on the caller's side and splitting this into role-interfaces would scatter one operation without relieving anything. The burden that does remain is the IMPLEMENTER's — all 35 signatures must be written and kept in step. Reduce it by collapsing overloads (optional or default parameters, or an options object) rather than by segregating the interface.
Fat interface: ISequence (21 members) src/Silverback.Integration/Messaging/Sequences/ISequence.cs:20 — `ISequence` declares 21 members: `SequenceId`, `Length`, `TotalLength`, `IsNew`, `IsPending`, `IsCompleting`, `IsComplete`, `IsAborted`, `IsBeingConsumed`, `AbortReason`, `AbortException`, `Sequences`, `ParentSequence`, `Context`, `StreamProvider`, `CreateStream`, `AddAsync`, `AbortIfIncompleteAsync`, `AbortAsync`, `GetCommitIdentifiers`, `GetRollbackIdentifiers`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
Fat interface: ITestingHelper (18 members) src/Silverback.Integration.Testing/Testing/ITestingHelper`1.cs:9 — `ITestingHelper` declares 18 members under just 8 distinct name(s): `Spy`, `GetConsumer`, `GetConsumerForEndpoint`, `GetProducerForEndpoint`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilConnectedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilAllMessagesAreConsumedAsync`, `WaitUntilOutboxIsEmptyAsync`, `WaitUntilOutboxIsEmptyAsync`, `IsOutboxEmptyAsync`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. That is an OVERLOAD SET, not 18 separate responsibilities: a caller binds to 8 operation(s) and uses the overload it selected, so the Interface-Segregation harm does NOT apply on the caller's side and splitting this into role-interfaces would scatter one operation without relieving anything. The burden that does remain is the IMPLEMENTER's — all 18 signatures must be written and kept in step. Reduce it by collapsing overloads (optional or default parameters, or an options object) rather than by segregating the interface.

M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×4

README/code drift docs/index.md:63 — docs/index.md links to `/v4/`, but `v4` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift tests/extended/README.md:92 — tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer`, but no file or folder `Kafka/ReconciliationConsumer` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift tests/extended/README.md:92 — tests/extended/README.md names `Kafka/MixedWorkload`, but no file or folder `Kafka/MixedWorkload` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
README/code drift tests/extended/README.md:92 — tests/extended/README.md names `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe`, but no file or folder `Diagnostics/ProgressProbe` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.

X4 · Structured logging · Interpolated log message defeats structured logging · ×3

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging src/Silverback.Integration/Diagnostics/IntegrationLoggerExtensions.cs:608 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging src/Silverback.Integration/Diagnostics/IntegrationLoggerExtensions.cs:634 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging src/Silverback.Integration/Diagnostics/IntegrationLoggerExtensions.cs:661 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.

D19 · Documentation Quality · Documentation · ×1

Documentation: contradicts the code docs/changelog/200.md — The changelog entry for release v2.1.2 mentions Confluent.Kafka 1.4.2 and RabbitMQ.Client 6.0.0, but the referenced Kafka.SchemaRegistry NuGet package is now versioned at 7.x. Verify that all cited NuGet versions match the current packages; if not, update them in the changelog.

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split Silverback.Integration · ×1

Split Silverback.Integration — 22671 LoC across 32 namespaces is a massive sprawling integration project whose namespaces are all Messaging subsystems (Broker, Producing, Broker.Callbacks) and unrelated ones like Configuration. Suggested: split into messaging broker/producer/consuming projects

D28 · Secrets (history) · Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1

REDACTED

D39 · IL Efficiency · IL efficiency · ×1

IL efficiency: 14 authored method(s) exceed the IL budget tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs:54 — 14 of 3452 first-party methods compile to oversized IL bodies (> 250 instructions); worst: Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies.DocumentationProvider.AppendSummaryForClientConfig @ tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/DocumentationProvider.cs:54, 1539 IL instructions; that pulled this dimension to 9.9/10. These bodies are far past the JIT's inline budget, so splitting them does not make them inlinable — what moves the number is emitting less: collapsing LINQ chains and closures on hot paths, and interpolation built eagerly where it is only sometimes used.

D9 · Test Distribution · Inverted test pyramid · ×1

Inverted test pyramid — Only 25 % of tests are unit tests (793 unit vs 2009 integration, 0 BDD); a broader unit base gives faster, more localised feedback.

M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1

No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.

P10 · Library API & versioning · Large public API surface · ×1

Large public API surface — 611/868 types (70%) are public. For a library, every public type is a stability contract — make internal-by-default and expose only the intended API.

P12 · CI test-gate honesty · Sleep-based test synchronization · ×1

Sleep-based test synchronization — 88 Task.Delay/Thread.Sleep call(s) in test code synchronize with background work by sleeping — a known flakiness precursor on slow runners. Prefer polling with a deadline or completion signals.

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 29/34 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log). Of those 34, 20 ship a process this repository operates; the rest are libraries their consumer hosts, where the logging decision belongs to the host.

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Not all async methods take a CancellationToken · ×1

Not all async methods take a CancellationToken — Only 124/270 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.

X5 · Nullable reference types · Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score · ×1

Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score — ~0.2 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 40 suppression(s) across the 196112 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). Each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.

Minor — 69 finding(s)

D19 · Documentation Quality · XML-doc coverage · ×47

XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Core src/Silverback.Core/Silverback.Core.csproj — Silverback.Core: 58 % XML-doc coverage (307/531).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Core.Rx src/Silverback.Core.Rx/Silverback.Core.Rx.csproj — Silverback.Core.Rx: 67 % XML-doc coverage (12/18).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Core.Model src/Silverback.Core.Model/Silverback.Core.Model.csproj — Silverback.Core.Model: 74 % XML-doc coverage (40/54).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Integration src/Silverback.Integration/Silverback.Integration.csproj — Silverback.Integration: 78 % XML-doc coverage (1089/1395).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Integration.Kafka src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.csproj — Silverback.Integration.Kafka: 63 % XML-doc coverage (763/1218).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Integration.HealthChecks src/Silverback.Integration.HealthChecks/Silverback.Integration.HealthChecks.csproj — Silverback.Integration.HealthChecks: 100 % XML-doc coverage (9/9).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry src/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry/Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry.csproj — Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry: 88 % XML-doc coverage (107/122).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft src/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft/Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft.csproj — Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft: 100 % XML-doc coverage (40/40).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Integration.MQTT src/Silverback.Integration.MQTT/Silverback.Integration.MQTT.csproj — Silverback.Integration.MQTT: 89 % XML-doc coverage (426/480).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Tools.Generators.Common tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.Common/Silverback.Tools.Generators.Common.csproj — Silverback.Tools.Generators.Common: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/7).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies/Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies.csproj — Silverback.Tools.Generators.KafkaConfigProxies: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/19).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Tools.Generators.MqttConfigProxies tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.MqttConfigProxies/Silverback.Tools.Generators.MqttConfigProxies.csproj — Silverback.Tools.Generators.MqttConfigProxies: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/17).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.LogEvents tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.LogEvents/Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.LogEvents.csproj — Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.LogEvents: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Storage.Memory src/Silverback.Storage.Memory/Silverback.Storage.Memory.csproj — Silverback.Storage.Memory: 94 % XML-doc coverage (59/63).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Storage.Sqlite src/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite/Silverback.Storage.Sqlite.csproj — Silverback.Storage.Sqlite: 98 % XML-doc coverage (62/63).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Storage.Relational src/Silverback.Storage.Relational/Silverback.Storage.Relational.csproj — Silverback.Storage.Relational: 41 % XML-doc coverage (20/49).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql src/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql/Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql.csproj — Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql: 97 % XML-doc coverage (98/101).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework src/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework/Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework.csproj — Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework: 96 % XML-doc coverage (80/83).
XML-doc coverage: Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.Headers tools/Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.Headers/Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.Headers.csproj — Silverback.Tools.Generators.Docs.Headers: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
XML-doc coverage: BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer/BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer.csproj — BinaryFileStreaming.Consumer: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/13).
XML-doc coverage: BinaryFileStreaming.Producer samples/Kafka/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer/BinaryFileStreaming.Producer.csproj — BinaryFileStreaming.Producer: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/14).
XML-doc coverage: Basic.Consumer samples/Kafka/Basic.Consumer/Basic.Consumer.csproj — Basic.Consumer: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/11).
XML-doc coverage: Basic.Common samples/Kafka/Basic.Common/Basic.Common.csproj — Basic.Common: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/2).
XML-doc coverage: Basic.Producer samples/Kafka/Basic.Producer/Basic.Producer.csproj — Basic.Producer: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/10).
XML-doc coverage: Basic.Common samples/MQTT/Basic.Common/Basic.Common.csproj — Basic.Common: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/4).
+ 22 more in this group — see findings.md.

D10 · Test Quality · Mock framework · ×20

Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Core.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Core.Model.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Tests.Common references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.Tests.E2E references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.Newtonsoft.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Tests.Common.Integration references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.Kafka.SchemaRegistry.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.MQTT.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.HealthChecks.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.Kafka.Testing.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.MQTT.Testing.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Storage.Memory.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Storage.Sqlite.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Storage.PostgreSql.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Storage.EntityFramework.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Integration.Testing.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Storage.Relational.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Silverback.Core.EFCore30.Tests references NSubstitute.

D10 · Test Quality · Skipped (documented) · ×2

Skipped (documented): Invoke_ShouldSwallowHandlerExceptions tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvokerTests.cs:126 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: TODO: Check why this was the expected behavior
Skipped (documented): InvokeAsync_ShouldSwallowHandlerExceptions tests/Silverback.Integration.Tests/Messaging/Broker/Callbacks/BrokerClientCallbacksInvokerTests.cs:279 — Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: TODO: Check why this was the expected behavior

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.

Dimension	Tool	Version	Command	Findings	Raw output
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-3107b80e2ef04aab84d601b53bc22ec1/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)	gitleaks	—	gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-3107b80e2ef04aab84d601b53bc22ec1/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	0	artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)	semgrep	—	semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .	3	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	nuget	—	nuget: not applicable — nuget: the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan	0	—
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	10	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 57 file(s) — `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/IAggregateRoot.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Domain/IDomainEvent.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/ICommand.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/ICommand`1.cs`, `src/Silverback.Core.Model/Messaging/Messages/IEvent.cs`, … (+52 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.	0	—
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing	provenance	—	provenance: not applicable — The CI pipeline builds and tests but publishes no released artifact — no package publish, container push, GitHub release or deployment step. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM attest RELEASED artifacts, so there is nothing to attest here. Add them to the release pipeline when this repo starts shipping artifacts (a published package, a container image, a deployed service or a tagged release).	0	—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy	disclosure	—	disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	none (no readable dependency manifest)	—	none (no readable dependency manifest): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).	0	—

Run 01a161be-2ebf-777a-926b-551bccac45b8 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Findings by how serious they are

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Architecture — bounded-context dependency graph

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 63% · Adequate · gated by D17 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 70% · Strong ·

At a glance — Maturity · 56% · Adequate · gated by M4 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 67% · Adequate ·

At a glance — Security · 79% · Strong ·

At a glance — Event-Driven · 100% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Performance · 79% · Strong ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Roadmap

File quality

How the grades work

Methodology & how to trust this report

Tools & methods

Run transparency — what happened this run

Limitations & what we did not check

Per-dimension blind spots

The LLM boundary

Dimensions

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts