Njabulo240/QuickStart

Executive summary

Njabulo240/QuickStart scores 30 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while six of its seven lenses score higher still: Performance at 100 and Architecture at 92, both rated Exemplary, Code Health at 60, rated Adequate, and Accessibility and Maturity at 40 and Security and Compliance at 35, all rated Weak.

The score is lower than those six because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 16 and is rated Critical. Its Code Coverage dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning and to resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 30 to about 42.

107 findings are critical: 61 in Dependency Vulnerabilities, 33 in Forms & labels, seven in Explicit Debt, two in Secret Scanning, one in Code Coverage, one in Static Analysis (SAST), one in Text alternatives and one in Web-Security Posture.

Watchdog couldn't measure 4 dimensions in this code, among them Dependency Hygiene, Navigability and IL Efficiency, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 5,325 lines, which would take an estimated 0.1 person-years, around €3,700, to rebuild.

Code Health 60 Adequate, capped by Structured logging Architecture 92 ★ Exemplary Maturity 40 Weak, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 16 ⚠ Critical, capped by Code Coverage, Test Distribution, Secret Scanning, Test Coverage, Tooling, CI/CD gates and Security & performance tooling Security and Compliance 35 Weak, capped by Static Analysis (SAST), Dependency Vulnerabilities and Access Controls Accessibility 40 Weak, capped by Forms & labels and Keyboard semantics Performance 100 ★ Exemplary

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.

Production Readiness 16 · counts for 46%Security and Compliance 35 · counts for 25%Accessibility 40 · counts for 14%Maturity 40 · counts for 8%Code Health 60 · counts for 4%Architecture 92 · counts for 2%Performance 100 · counts for 1%

If Production Readiness rose from 16 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 30 to about 42.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Business logic 9%Supporting code 91%

New since the last survey: 78 findings

These 78 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026.

Explicit Debt · Dead code: ConfigureExceptionHandler QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/ExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: LogInfo QuickStart/Contracts/ILoggerManager.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: LogWarn QuickStart/Contracts/ILoggerManager.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: LogDebug QuickStart/Contracts/ILoggerManager.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: EmailConfirmationRequestDto QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/EmailConfirmationRequestDto.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: TokenDto QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/TokenDto.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: SendEmail QuickStart/EmailService/IEmailSender.cs
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Access Controls · No authorization REDACTED
Web-Security Posture · Cryptographic key material is a compile-time constant QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/UserManagerServiceExtensions.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetAccountAsync QuickStart/Repository/AccountRepository.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetAccountsAsync QuickStart/Repository/AccountRepository.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetAuditLogsAsync QuickStart/Repository/AuditRepository.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetCustomerAsync QuickStart/Repository/CustomerRepository.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetCustomersAsync QuickStart/Repository/CustomerRepository.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: SaveAsync QuickStart/Repository/RepositoryManager.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: CreateAccountForCustomerAsync QuickStart/Service/AccountService.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: DeleteAccountForCustomerAsync QuickStart/Service/AccountService.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetAccountAsync QuickStart/Service/AccountService.cs
Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken: GetAccountsAync QuickStart/Service/AccountService.cs
Visual & motion safety · Focus outline removed in CSS without a :focus replacement QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css
Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css
Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css
Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css

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: 4 findings

These 4 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

Coupling · Off the main sequence: EmailService
Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] REDACTED
Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] REDACTED

Rebuild cost: about €3,700 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€1,200 to €6,100, for 21 to 64 hours of work, about 0.1 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem	Low, 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	×0.7 at a score of 30. 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	Small: 5,325 lines of product code
Comment lines	The estimate prices 5,305 lines. Comment lines count towards the size of 5,325 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 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED, REDACTED.

Raises the score by about 12 points · Low effort · Secret Scanning

Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage.

Raises the score by about 12 points · Low effort · Code Coverage

Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution.

Raises the score by about 12 points · Low effort · Test Distribution

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 €3,700 to build again, about 0.1 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 16 (Critical). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.

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

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

If you do one thing first · First action

Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 12 points for low effort, because it clears the 2 Secret Scanning 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 — module dependency graph

Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways — a layering smell or cycle. A clean layered graph has none.

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.

86 modules, with 99 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 46 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 →	2 Entities.Identity	3 Entities.Models	4 QuickStartUI.src.app.core.password-confirmation-validator_service	5 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.authentication_service	6 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.data_service	7 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.dialog_service	8 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.nav_service	9 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.repository_service	10 Shared.DataTransferObjects.Account	11 Shared.DataTransferObjects.AuditLog	12 Shared.DataTransferObjects.Authentication	13 Shared.DataTransferObjects.Customer	14 Shared.DataTransferObjects.User	15 Shared.DataTransferObjects.UserRole	16 Contracts	35 Service.Contracts	38 Repository
1 Entities.Exceptions
2 Entities.Identity
3 Entities.Models
4 QuickStartUI.src.app.core.password-confirmation-validator_service
5 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.authentication_service
6 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.data_service
7 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.dialog_service
8 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.nav_service
9 QuickStartUI.src.app.shared.services.repository_service
10 Shared.DataTransferObjects.Account
11 Shared.DataTransferObjects.AuditLog
12 Shared.DataTransferObjects.Authentication
13 Shared.DataTransferObjects.Customer
14 Shared.DataTransferObjects.User
15 Shared.DataTransferObjects.UserRole
16 Contracts		3
17 QuickStartUI.src.app.layouts.full.sidebar.nav-item.nav-item_component							1
18 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.authentication.change-defualt-password.change-defualt-password_component			1	1		1
19 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.authentication.change-password.change-password_component			1	1		1
20 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.authentication.forgot-password.forgot-password_component				1		1
21 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.authentication.login.login_component				1		1
22 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.authentication.reset-password.reset-password_component			1	1		1
23 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.dashboard.dashboard_component								1
24 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.lists.add-account.add-account_component					1	1		1
25 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.lists.add-customer.add-customer_component					1	1		1
26 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.lists.details.details_component						1		1
27 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.lists.lists_component					1	1		1
28 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.lists.update-customer.update-customer_component					1	1		1
29 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.roles.add-role.add-role_component					1	1		1
30 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.roles.roles_component					1	1		1
31 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.roles.update-role.update-role_component					1	1		1
32 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.users.add-user.add-user_component				1	1	1		1
33 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.users.update-user.update-user_component					1	1		1
34 QuickStartUI.src.app.pages.ui-components.users.users_component					1	1		1
35 Service.Contracts									3	3	8	3	2	3
36 QuickStart	1														1
37 QuickStart.Presentation.Controllers									2	1	6	2	1	2		6
38 Repository	1	6													8
39 Service	5	2							3	3	8	3	2	3	11	13
40 QuickStart.Extensions															1		1

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 60% · Adequate · gated by X4 ·

The Good

D1 · .NET / C# Cyclomatic Complexity 10.0 D2 · .NET / C# Cognitive Complexity 10.0 D3 · .NET / C# God Classes 10.0 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 10.0 R1 · React / TS Type Safety 10.0 R10 · React / TS Code Duplication 7.6 R2 · React / TS Cyclomatic Complexity 10.0 R3 · React / TS Large Files 10.0 R7 · React / TS Dead Code 9.4 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 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 X3 · Repo Exception handling 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 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 9.2

The Bad

D17 · .NET / C# Explicit Debt 5.9

The Ugly

X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 4.3 X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 4.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 2.7

At a glance — Architecture · 92% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · .NET / C# Coupling 9.2 D6 · .NET / C# Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D26 · .NET / C# Project Cohesion 10.0 D35 · .NET / C# Change Coupling 10.0 AX1 · Repo Captive dependencies 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 7.2 AX2 · Repo Stateful singletons 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 10.0 R9 · React / TS Circular Imports 10.0

The Ugly

D22 · .NET / C# Internal API Consistency 4.0

At a glance — Maturity · 40% · Weak · gated by M2 ·

The Good

D15 · .NET / C# Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D19 · .NET / C# Documentation Quality 7.0 D21 · .NET / C# Naming Consistency 7.5 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Bad

M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 6.7

The Ugly

D24 · .NET / C# Comment Value 3.5 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 0.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 4.0

At a glance — Readiness · 16% · Critical · gated by D8, D9, D13, R4, R6, P1, P3 ·

The Good

D14 · .NET / C# License Compliance 10.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 8.0 P8 · Repo Schema migrations 10.0 R5 · React / TS Dependency Freshness 7.5 R8 · React / TS Dependency Hygiene 7.5

The Bad

P2 · Repo Observability 6.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 5.0

The Ugly

D8 · .NET / C# Code Coverage 0.0 D13 · .NET / C# Secret Scanning 0.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 0.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 0.0 R4 · React / TS Test Coverage 0.0 R6 · React / TS Tooling 3.4

At a glance — Security · 35% · Weak · gated by D29, D30, C2 ·

The Good

D28 · .NET / C# Secrets (history) 10.0 D43 · .NET / C# Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · .NET / C# Platform End-of-Life 10.0 C3 · Repo Audit Trail 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

The Ugly

D29 · .NET / C# Static Analysis (SAST) 2.4 D30 · .NET / C# Dependency Vulnerabilities 0.0 C1 · Repo Data Protection 4.0 C2 · Repo Access Controls 0.0 C5 · Repo Data-Subject Rights 4.0 S1 · Repo Web-Security Posture 4.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 3.5

At a glance — Accessibility · 40% · Weak · gated by AC2, AC4 ·

The Good

AC3 · Repo Page structure 10.0 AC5 · Repo ARIA correctness 10.0

The Bad

AC1 · Repo Text alternatives 5.5

The Ugly

AC2 · Repo Forms & labels 3.9 AC4 · Repo Keyboard semantics 1.0 AC6 · Repo Visual & motion safety 4.0 AC7 · Repo A11y enforcement 4.0

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

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
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures	87	High / Critical
A05:2025 — Injection	25	High / Critical
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures	2	High / Critical

Roadmap

Immediately resolve the two leaked secrets in REDACTED and REDACTED, then address the single gap in automated code coverage. Establish a CI workflow to build and run tests on every push, which will also serve as the foundation for integrating security tooling like CodeQL or Semgrep to prevent regressions.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED, REDACTED.	+11.7 pts	Low	Secret Scanning
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage.	+11.7 pts	Low	Code Coverage
Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution.	+11.7 pts	Low	Test Distribution
Resolve the 4 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with EmailSender.cs, REDACTED, RepositoryContext.cs.	+1.6 pts	Low	Comment Value
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.	+2.9 pts	Medium	CI/CD gates
Run what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.	+2.9 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).	+2.9 pts	Medium	Test Coverage
Protect endpoints by default-deny: [Authorize] + role/policy authorization, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from every handler.	+2.4 pts	Medium	Access Controls

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 35 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 11% slop · 49% mixed · 40% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	0.0	Slop	Dependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	1.5	Slop	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.6	Slop	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.6	Slop	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.2	Mixed	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.7	Mixed	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.9	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.9	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED	6.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED	6.3	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
QuickStart/Contracts/ILoggerManager.cs	6.9	Mixed	Explicit Debt: Dead code: LogInfo
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Secret Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	7.2	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
QuickStart/Service/AccountService.cs	7.6	Mixed	Explicit Debt: WriteOnlyPrivateField
QuickStart/Service/AuditService.cs	7.6	Mixed	Explicit Debt: WriteOnlyPrivateField
QuickStart/Service/CustomerService.cs	7.6	Mixed	Explicit Debt: WriteOnlyPrivateField
QuickStart/Service/RoleService.cs	7.6	Mixed	Explicit Debt: WriteOnlyPrivateField
QuickStart/Service/UserService.cs	7.6	Mixed	Explicit Debt: WriteOnlyPrivateField
REDACTED	7.9	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED

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 — 107

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 — 173

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 — 40

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

Could not be resolved — 6

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. 83 of 88 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 5 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 — 88 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D5D6D8D9D13D14D15D17D19D21D22D24D26D28D29D30D35D43D44AC1AC2AC3AC4AC5AC6AC7AX1AX10AX2AX3AX5AX6C1C2C3C5GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P6P8PF3R1R10R2R3R4R5R6R7R8R9S1X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X32X4X5

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, 290 of 320 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	Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR	1.86.0 · 0.69.3	✓ 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 01a161f4-9788-72d3-b61c-9c5c5ae3af52.

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: `dotnet list package` exited 1 with no output.
D14 License Compliance — 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. This repository declares package.json, but the licence verdict published here was taken over its NuGet package dependencies. Nothing was read about its npm dependencies' licensing in either direction, and a clean score on this card must not be read as covering them.
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots — measured, with a gap in what it reached — 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. Git history depth insufficient — this repository has 29 commit(s), too few for a reliable trend signal. The clone is complete, so there is no deeper history to fetch: the signal returns as the project accumulates history.
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 (2 contributor(s) across 29 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 97% of the history; the other 1 hold 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 7 deducted marker(s) and the 2.1/KLoC density on this row were taken over this repository's .NET projects ALONE: .ts (2,932 lines, 55% of production source) went unread, because every marker collector on this path is reached through a C# workspace. D17's marker collectors need a compiler we do not have for that language, so none of its nine marker kinds were read there. The debt in that source is UNMEASURED — its absence from the score above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that the code carries none.
D27 Navigability — 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. This check's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
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. `QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/8.fc417176847dac24.js` 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.
D34 Knowledge Freshness — 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. Too few commits to judge knowledge freshness (29 commit(s) sampled).
D35 Change Coupling — measured, with a gap in what it reached — 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. Git history depth insufficient — this repository has 29 commit(s), too few for a reliable change-coupling signal. The clone is complete, so there is no deeper history to fetch: the signal returns as the project accumulates history.
D39 IL Efficiency — 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. IL NOT MEASURED: the analyzer's own build of this repository failed for an ENVIRONMENT reason (exit 1) — MSBuild's engine or the CLR gave up, or our image does not carry the SDK band/targeting pack this repository needs. This is OUR limitation, not a defect in the repo, and it is not a statement that this repository fails to build. D18 owns the question of whether this repository builds; it was not answered here.
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 DevServer (start). the dev server did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time — no runtime evidence.
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. 22 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 62.

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.
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.
D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the test suite inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
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.
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.
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.
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.
D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
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.
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").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
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.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
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.
AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
AC4 Keyboard semantics: Keyboard semantics are inferred from markup attributes — interactivity wired purely in script, focus managed at runtime, and component-level handlers are invisible. A clean result means "no static keyboard-trap shape", not a keyboard-operability proof.
AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
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.
C3 Audit Trail: This control is scored from in-repo evidence only — a working control configured outside the repository leaves no signal a static scan can credit.
C5 Data-Subject Rights: This control is scored from in-repo evidence only — absence of evidence here means the scan found no in-repo trace, not that the control does not exist.
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".
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 (5): D19, D21, D22, D24, 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 Complexity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 god class(es) detected.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling9.2 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ 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 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

Off the main sequence: EntitiesREDACTED:1

Off the main sequence: SharedQuickStart/Shared/Shared.csproj:1

What to do

Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Coupling in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. 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 10 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D8 · Code Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How much of the code is actually exercised by tests.

Method: Coverage from coverlet runs or committed reports (Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov), computed per-file with structured exclusions for generated, trivial, and glue code. When the suite can't be built/run in-image AND no report is committed, coverage is reported NOT-MEASURED (excluded from the score) with the precondition to make it measurable — never a LoC-ratio proxy folded in as if measured. Deterministic.

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

No automated tests — no test code was found in this repository.

No automated tests

What to do

Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Coverage in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d8_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test Distribution0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No test suite found.

No tests found

What to do

Resolve the 1 No tests found 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?

D13 · Secret Scanning0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

2 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 2 Leaked secret finding(s) in Secret Scanning — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Secret Scanning in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. 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 250 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 11 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 239 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. ★ COVERAGE OF THIS VERDICT: it grades this repository's NuGet package dependencies and nothing else. The repository also declares package.json, and the licences of those dependencies were NOT read by this pass — a gap in this engine's coverage, not a statement about them. So this result says the graded closure carries no banned licence; it does NOT say this repository's licensing is clear.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt5.9 / 10Adequate✓ 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 5.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

7 deducted debt markers + 8 dead symbols across 2378 LoC in the .NET projects (2.1/KLoC) → score 5.9. Measured on the .NET source only: .ts (55% of production source) was not read, and carries at least 0 uncounted task marker(s) in 0 file(s).

WriteOnlyPrivateField · ×7QuickStart/Service/AccountService.cs:14

Dead code: AuditLogMiddleware · ×8QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/AuditLogMiddleware.cs:7

What to do

Resolve the 8 Dead code finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with ILoggerManager.cs (3), AuditLogMiddleware.cs, ExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 7 WriteOnlyPrivateField finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with REDACTED (2), AccountService.cs, AuditService.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 issue-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Explicit Debt in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. 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?

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's root README is a strong overview of the project (ASP.NET Core/Angular/Admin template, SOLID architecture, authentication/authorization, live demo) and an excellent installation guide that covers both cloning from GitHub and downloading a zip with two separate folders. It also begins to outline the application components it contains before clipping mid-installation ('Open the Solution...'), so further sections like configuring the connection string or running migrations are not yet flagged as missing. The document is clear, complete, and well-structured for an initial README.

Low XML-doc coverage: QuickStart · ×10REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 10 Low XML-doc coverage finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with REDACTED, Contracts.csproj, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (10 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyStrong◐ 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 Strong / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

2 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

Inconsistent spelling of the suffix 'Async' in method names. 'GetAccountsAync' uses a typo ('Aync') while other similar async methods ('GetAuditLogsAsync', 'GetAccountsAsync') correctly use 'Async'.

Inconsistent casing convention for entity properties. Most properties in the Customer entity (Country, Address, LastName) use PascalCase, but 'status' uses camelCase. This breaks the naming convention for the domain model.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Inconsistent spelling of the suffix 'Async' in method names.… finding(s) in Naming Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent casing convention for entity properties. Most properties in… finding(s) in Naming Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyWeak◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether the internal API surface is consistent and coherent.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature over a sample of the public API surface (IsPackable or .Contracts types). Sampled, advisory; confidence discounted by model uncertainty.

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

5 API inconsistencies across 7 exposed types.

Inconsistent naming conventions for retrieval operations. Some services use 'GetAll' for collections (ICustomerService, IUserService, IRoleService) while others use 'Get' (IAccountService). Additionally, singular retrieval uses 'Get' vs 'GetById'. There is also a typo in IAccountService.GetAccountsAync.

Inconsistent naming for creation and modification operations. 'Create' is used for IAccountService and ICustomerService, but 'Edit' is used for IRoleService. 'Update' is used for IUserService and ICustomerService. 'CreateAccountForCustomerAsync' implies a specific context not present in 'CreateCustomerAsync'.

IAccountService methods include 'ForCustomer' in their names, implying a nested resource pattern, whereas ICustomerService methods do not include 'ForCustomer' (e.g., CreateCustomerAsync vs CreateAccountForCustomerAsync). This creates an inconsistent API surface for similar hierarchical relationships.

IAccountService has inconsistent parameter signatures compared to other services. It requires 'customerId' for all operations, while ICustomerService only requires 'customerId' for Get/Update/Delete but not Create. This inconsistency in required parameters for similar CRUD operations across services is confusing.

IAccountService uses 'trackChanges' as a boolean parameter for all methods, while ICustomerService also uses 'trackChanges' but IRoleService and IUserService do not. This inconsistency in tracking changes across services suggests a lack of unified data access strategy.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming conventions for retrieval operations. Some services… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming for creation and modification operations. 'Create'… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 IAccountService methods include 'ForCustomer' in their names, implying a… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d22_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D24 · Comment ValueWeak◐ 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 Weak / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 valuable / 4 redundant across 5 sampled comments; 4 shown with locations.

redundant comment · ×4QuickStart/EmailService/EmailSender.cs:75

What to do

Resolve the 4 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with EmailSender.cs, REDACTED, RepositoryContext.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion10.0 / 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 of 10 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)2.4 / 10Critical✓ 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 2.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

25 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 24 medium, 0 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 1 file(s) — `QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/8.fc417176847dac24.js` — so no absence of findings in them is evidence of anything, and nothing in them was analysed. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 24 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED (5), REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (24 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependency has a known published vulnerability (CVE), direct or transitive, in ANY ecosystem the repository declares — Dart pub, Elixir and Erlang via Hex, Go modules, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, JavaScript/npm, .NET/NuGet, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift.

Method: Dependency-CVE scan across every ecosystem the repository declares, scored ONCE. Three sources are unioned and deduplicated by advisory identity (rule id + alias closure, CVE<->GHSA) scoped to package+version, keeping the worst severity: `osv-scanner --recursive` over osv.dev for Dart pub, Elixir/Hex (and Erlang, whose `rebar.lock` syft first converts to a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the lock), Go, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle (and Scala, whose sbt build's pinned direct declarations are written into a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the build file), npm, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift; `trivy fs --scanners vuln` for npm lockfiles; and `dotnet list package --vulnerable --include-transitive` for NuGet (with per-advisory collapse of the project x target-framework fan-out), plus a DECLARED-dependency arm that resolves a published gem's gemspec against rubygems.org where no Gemfile.lock is committed. `SeverityScore(c,h,m,l, normalizer 8.0)`. NotApplicable only when NO ecosystem is readable; if any applicable ecosystem could not be scanned the findings are REPORTED and the score is withheld. Supersedes the npm and OSV arms, retired 2026-09-05.

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

87 finding(s): 5 critical, 56 high, 18 medium, 8 low.

REDACTED

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

What to do

Resolve the 55 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (47), REDACTED (3), REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (55 issue-level).
Resolve the 5 Critical CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 High vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.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?

D43 · Malicious Dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.

Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.

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

No dependency in any ecosystem this repository declares is published as malicious.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.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 10 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.

AC1 · Text alternatives5.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether non-text content carries a text alternative — img/area/input[type=image] have alt, a meaningful svg has a title or aria-label, video has a captions track, and object/embed/canvas have a name or fallback content. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: every img/area/input[type=image] checked for alt, svg[role=img] for a title/aria-label, video for a captions <track>. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: image/media elements — img, area, input[type=image], svg, video, object, embed, canvas — across the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and dynamic-attribute elements are skipped. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is NOT read by any producer, so it contributes no element to this population; where such a frontend is present the card discloses it as an analyzer gap rather than scoring around it.

An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative. — QuickStartUI/src/app/layouts/full/header/header.component.html:18

What to do

Add a text alternative — alt on images (alt="" for purely decorative ones), a title or aria-label on meaningful svg, an aria-label or inner fallback content on canvas, and a captions <track> on video.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC2 · Forms & labels3.9 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.

Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it. (×28) — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.html:19, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.html:28, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-password/change-password.component.html:17, …
This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label. (×5) — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/forgot-password/forgot-password.component.html:22, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.html:22, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.html:14, …

What to do

Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC3 · Page structure10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether pages declare a language (well-formed BCP-47) and a non-empty title, expose exactly one main landmark and a sane heading order with non-empty headings, keep zoom enabled, title their iframes, give data tables header cells, and avoid meta-refresh. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: html lang, document <title>, a main landmark and heading order on full documents only, plus zoom-disabling viewports, untitled iframes and meta-refresh anywhere. Deterministic, per structural checkpoint.

Coverage: Population: the PARSED MARKUP documents (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx). The page-level checks — lang, title, single main landmark — fire ONCE PER FULL DOCUMENT (an <html> root) and never on a partial or component fragment, so a repo of fragments is assessed only on the per-element checks (heading order, table headers, iframe titles, meta-refresh, zoom). Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC4 · Keyboard semantics1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether interactive behaviour is keyboard-reachable — no click handler on a non-interactive element lacking a role, tabindex and key handler, no element the repo's own CSS styles `cursor: pointer` without giving it any of the three, no unfocusable element whose only binding is a mouse enter/leave pair or a double-click, no positive tabindex, no href-less anchor, no placeholder-href (#/javascript) link acting as a button. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: click handlers on non-interactive elements lacking role+tabindex+key handler, positive tabindex values, and href-less anchors. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: elements that pose a keyboard-semantics question, in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) — a non-natively-interactive element carrying a click handler, a double-click or hover enter/leave binding, a pointer-only gesture on a tabindex="0" element, or `cursor: pointer` from the repo's own CSS; an href-less or placeholder-href (#, javascript:) anchor; and any element with a positive tabindex. Natively interactive elements used correctly (<button>, <a href>, form controls) are NOT in the population — there is nothing to judge — so a page of nothing but correct controls gives AC4 nothing to measure. Keyboard reachability is judged from the markup, never from a rendered page. ★ An interactive element declared in a tagged-template (html`…`) or hyperscript frontend is NOT in this population — no producer reads either — so an empty population is reported as an analyzer gap, never as "this repository has no interactive elements".

An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action. (×5) — QuickStartUI/src/app/layouts/full/header/header.component.html:39, QuickStartUI/src/app/layouts/full/sidebar/nav-item/nav-item.component.html:4, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.html:7, …

What to do

Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC5 · ARIA correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, valid (non-misspelled) aria-* attribute names, in-enum values for token-typed aria-* attributes, and no aria-hidden on (or wrapping) a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: role values checked against the WAI-ARIA role set (abstract/invalid flagged), required ARIA state for a role, and aria-hidden on a focusable element. Deterministic, role/attribute level.

Coverage: Population: elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) that carry a role or an aria-* attribute; roles and token values are checked against the ARIA enums exhaustively within that set. An expression-valued (dynamic) role or aria-* value is skipped rather than guessed, and markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC6 · Visual & motion safety4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether focus outlines aren't removed without a replacement, motion respects prefers-reduced-motion, and literal CSS colour pairs meet contrast — PARTIAL: inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS literals are read (hex/rgb/hsl/named), never computed/runtime/external-CDN colour. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup/CSS scan: inline outline:none/0, literal inline colour/background contrast against the 4.5:1 AA floor, and <style>-block animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard. Deterministic but PARTIAL — only inline styles and in-repo CSS literals are visible.

Coverage: Population: styled elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx), plus in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files and CSS-in-JS literals. Colour contrast is computed from LITERAL colour pairs only (hex/rgb/hsl/named, including var() tokens and Tailwind neutral utilities) — computed, runtime-themed and external-CDN colour is never resolved, so this is a partial read of contrast by construction. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

`.cdk-visually-hidden` sets the outline to none/0 and no visible :focus / :focus-visible style for that element replaces it in this stylesheet, so a keyboard user cannot see where focus is. Draw a focus ring (outline, box-shadow or border) under :focus-visible. — QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:1
`.mat-badge-content` moves (`transition: transform .2s ease-in-out`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce. — QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:1
`.sidebarNav` moves (`transition: width .4s cubic-bezier(.25,.8,.25,1)`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce. — QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:1
`.la-ball-clip-rotate>div` moves (`animation: ball-clip-rotate .75s linear infinite`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce. — QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:5

What to do

Keep a visible focus style (don't remove the outline without a replacement), guard animation with prefers-reduced-motion, and raise low-contrast colour pairs to at least 4.5:1.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set, e.g. eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y or vuejs-accessibility where the project lints JavaScript) and an automated accessibility assertion wired into tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or an equivalent) — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.

Method: Repo config/CI scan: an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set such as eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility where JavaScript is linted) and an automated accessibility assertion in tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or equivalent), graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.

Coverage: Population: the repository's own tooling configuration — lint config, test and CI files — NOT the markup. It is read for a configured accessibility checker and an automated accessibility assertion (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse, or a native-toolkit equivalent), and it credits an INVOCATION, never a mention: a licence filename, an import comment or a doc reference earns no rung. Enforcement configured entirely outside the repository leaves no evidence here and cannot be credited.

No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (@angular-eslint/eslint-plugin-template (a11y rules)) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 32 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add @angular-eslint/eslint-plugin-template (a11y rules), then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX10 · Code composition7.2 / 10Strong✓ 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 singletons10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.

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.

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 segregation10.0 / 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

C1 · Data Protection4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether sensitive data is encrypted at rest and in transit and keys are vaulted.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: encryption presence (EF ColumnEncryption, key-vault references, HTTPS enforcement) and key-derivation KDF detection. Deterministic.

What to do

Strengthen data-at-rest protection: vault your keys (Azure Key Vault / AWS KMS / IDataProtector key ring) and encrypt the most sensitive columns (EF HasConversion encryption or provider-native column encryption) — partial coverage still leaves gaps.

Do you agree with this assessment?

C2 · Access Controls0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether access is authorized by default — a framework authorization attribute/decorator or policy, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from handlers.

Method: Roslyn scan: [Authorize] usage and authorization policies, plus imperative throw-on-violation guard methods detected via syntax. Deterministic.

No [Authorize]/policies and no imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) were found — endpoints may be unprotected.
`AccountController.GetAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. (×2) — REDACTED:17, REDACTED:24
`AccountController.CreateAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:32
`AccountController.DeleteAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:41
`AccountController.UpdateAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:50
`AuditLogController.GetAudits` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:16
`AuditLogController.GetMonthAsync` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:23
`AuditLogController.GetTotalForSingleMonth` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:31
`AuthenticationController.RegisterUser` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:17
`AuthenticationController.Authenticate` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:34
`AuthenticationController.ChangePassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:47
`AuthenticationController.ChangeDefaultPassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:62
`AuthenticationController.forgetPassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:77
`AuthenticationController.ResetPassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:87
`CustomerController.GetCustomers` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:17
`CustomerController.GetCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:25
`CustomerController.CreateCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:34
`CustomerController.DeleteCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:43
`CustomerController.UpdateCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:52
`FallbackController.Index` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:7
`RoleController.GetRoles` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:17
`RoleController.CreateRole` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:26
`RoleController.UpdateCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:35
`RoleController.DeleteRole` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:43
`RoleController.GetRole` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:51
`UserController.GetUsers` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:17
`UserController.GetUser` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:25
`UserController.UpdateUser` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:33
`UserController.DeleteUser` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase. — REDACTED:41

What to do

Protect endpoints by default-deny: [Authorize] + role/policy authorization, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from every handler.

Do you agree with this assessment?

C3 · Audit Trail10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether changes to sensitive data are recorded (who, what, when) for compliance + incident response.

Method: Roslyn scan: audit-trail mechanism graded (SaveChanges interceptor/immutable AuditLog/[Audited] strong; bare IAuditable/AddAuditing weak). Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

C5 · Data-Subject Rights4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether GDPR data-subject requests are supported in code — erasure, export/portability, consent.

Method: Roslyn scan: GDPR data-subject-rights corroboration (erasure/export/consent vocabulary co-occurring with subject-id store crossing or explicit GDPR pattern). Deterministic, gated by PII.

Corroborated rights: erasure ✓ · export ✗ · consent ✗. Each tick means this scan found code in the repository implementing that right — a deletion/anonymisation path for erasure, a data-export or portability path for export, and consent state recorded alongside the personal data it authorises. A ✗ therefore means no such code was recognised HERE, not that the right is unsupported: a capability provided by a platform, a manual runbook, or code spelled in a way this scan does not match is not visible to it. Confirm before treating a cross as a gap; where it is one, the right has to be fulfilled manually.

What to do

Implement data export/portability for a data subject (a machine-readable export of their personal data).
Track GDPR consent (lawful basis) alongside the personal data it authorises.

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 line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). (×2) — REDACTED:19, QuickStart/Repository/RepositoryContext.cs:61

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)6.7 / 10Adequate✓ 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

Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 10 of 10 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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.
No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.

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.
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M3 · Folder & project structure4.0 / 10Weak✓ 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.

Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
Only 2/10 projects share a common root namespace — the code's module identity is inconsistent.

What to do

Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
Start a test surface where your build system looks for one (tests/, test/, spec/, or your ecosystem's test source set) — the separation follows from putting the first tests in the right place.
Adopt a consistent root-namespace convention (a shared prefix, e.g. Acme.*); short project-file/directory names are fine as long as the RootNamespace is uniform.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation accuracy10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P1 · CI/CD gates0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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.

No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.

What to do

Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability6.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

What to do

Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics and a health-check endpoint for operability.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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.

No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

What to do

Run what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
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.

Deployment is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever reaches the release trigger goes to production unreviewed, so a mistaken merge or tag is live before anyone can stop it.

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)

What to do

Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P8 · Schema migrations10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Readiness · Readiness — Whether EF Core schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than the un-evolvable EnsureCreated().

Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage; off .NET, a file scan of dependency manifests, migration histories (Flyway, Liquibase, Alembic, Django, Rails, Prisma, TypeORM, Knex/Sequelize, golang-migrate, goose, Laravel, Doctrine, Diesel/sqlx) and schema auto-create in production source or config. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R1 · Type Safety10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.

Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R10 · Code Duplication7.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.

Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.

11 duplicated blocks under QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories audits, lists, roles, users — 8 of them are reported below, and 3 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 11 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 11 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 11 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:20
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:20 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:13 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 406 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:20
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:26 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/update-user/update-user.component.ts:27 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 358 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:26
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:37 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/update-user/update-user.component.ts:40 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 278 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:37
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:22 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:26 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 273 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:22
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:14 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:14 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 219 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:14
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:25 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/reset-password/reset-password.component.ts:27 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 182 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:25
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:53 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:44 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:53
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:97 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/roles.component.ts:65 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/users.component.ts:68 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:97
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:20 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:24 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:20
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:32 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:28 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:34 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:39 · +1 more site(s) not listed — the 5 copies are spread across 5 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:32
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/roles.component.ts:68 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/users.component.ts:72 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/roles.component.ts:68
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:110 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/update-user/update-user.component.ts:98 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:110
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:61 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-password/change-password.component.ts:61 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:61
QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:68 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/users.component.ts:86 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:68
QuickStartUI/src/app/core/error.interceptor.ts:6 · QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/error-handler.service.ts:7 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — QuickStartUI/src/app/core/error.interceptor.ts:6
QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/authentication.service.ts:55 · QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/authentication.service.ts:63 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/authentication.service.ts:55

What to do

Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.

Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R3 · Large Files10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.

Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R4 · Test Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.

Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.

0% of 50 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count

What to do

Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).

Do you agree with this assessment?

R5 · Dependency Freshness7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — How outdated the npm dependencies are (a maturity signal). JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30 (JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities).

Method: npm dependency staleness from manifest/registry metadata (a maturity signal; JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30, which answers dependency vulnerabilities for every ecosystem). Deterministic.

What to do

Bump outdated dependencies to current versions to limit upgrade debt.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R6 · Tooling3.4 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.

Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.

test ✓ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.

What to do

Add eslint and `tsc --noEmit` as package.json scripts and run them in CI.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R7 · Dead Code9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).

Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.

Unreachable from the 1 application, 3 tooling and 0 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. Gate removals on `npm run build` — an undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
no import path from any entry point (1 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make (×2) — QuickStartUI/src/app/core/error.interceptor.ts, QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/chat-message.ts
Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal. (×5) — QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/chart.ts:18, QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/chart.ts:29, QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/user.ts:1, …

What to do

Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R8 · Dependency Hygiene7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.

Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.

Declared in QuickStartUI/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it. (×3)

What to do

Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.

Do you agree with this assessment?

R9 · Circular Imports10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.

Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.

Do you agree with this assessment?

S1 · Web-Security Posture4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Transport security, security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order and crypto hygiene (presence, not runtime).

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir source itself (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not) for the arms that hold whether or not the code serves HTTP: a weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source, a TLS client that accepts any certificate, and (JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Elixir) an obsolete TLS version; the server controls are not assessed there, and a Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir repository that serves no HTTP of its own is N/A on them. Deterministic.

The value is the token-signing key and is a compile-time constant, so the secret this operation depends on is published with the source. A key that ships with the source is not secret: every contributor, fork, mirror and released binary carries it, so anyone holding the repository can decrypt what any installation encrypted, and there is no way to invalidate what was already protected because every deployment built from this source shares the value. Where the constant is a password salt the consequence differs but is no smaller — one global salt means precomputation amortises across every installation, which is the property salting exists to destroy. Read the value from configuration, an environment variable or a secrets manager at startup and FAIL FAST when it is absent, so a missing key stops the process instead of silently falling back to a shared default; treat the committed value as disclosed and rotate it rather than only deleting the line. For a salt, generate a fresh random one per password and store it alongside the hash. — QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/UserManagerServiceExtensions.cs:51
None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is configured — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
This web host's pipeline is composed here and adds no security response header (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, a frame policy) to what it serves. — QuickStart/QuickStart/Program.cs:13

What to do

Load cryptographic key and salt material from configuration, an environment variable or a secrets manager rather than fixing it in the source, and fail fast at startup when it is absent — a default that silently works is the one that reaches production. Rotate anything already committed: it must be treated as disclosed. Salts should be generated per password and stored with the hash, never shared across installations.
Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy first, then Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options and a frame policy) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X1 · Async correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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 correctness4.3 / 10Weak✓ 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.

`reader` is a `StreamReader`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 71). Every use of it in `ReadRequestBody` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var reader = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw. — QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/AuditLogMiddleware.cs:71

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 propagation4.0 / 10Weak✓ 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 1/60 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, and the token `request.HttpContext.RequestAborted` carries reaches none of the calls here that take one — this work can't be stopped early once started. Pass `request.HttpContext.RequestAborted` on, or take a CancellationToken. — QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/AuditLogMiddleware.cs:68
No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×38) — REDACTED:17, REDACTED:24, REDACTED:32, …

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 unescaped3.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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.

`string.Format("<h2 style='color:red;'>{0}</h2>", message.Content)` is text this program did not author, and it is written into the text of an element through an HTML e-mail body with nothing encoding it for that place. Whoever controls the value controls the markup: it can close the element or attribute it sits in and open a script of its own. Encode it for HTML at this site, render it through the framework's escaping output, or sanitise it if it must stay markup. — QuickStart/EmailService/EmailSender.cs:40

What to do

Each finding names the expression, the attribute it lands in and the line. Confirm the value's origin from the read this analyzer traced, then escape it at the sink or validate it against the shape the attribute accepts before interpolating.

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 handling10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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 logging2.7 / 10Weak✓ 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. (×2) — QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/ExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs:22, QuickStart/QuickStart/GlobalExceptionHandler.cs:32

What to do

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging

Do you agree with this assessment?

X5 · Nullable reference types9.2 / 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.

9/10 NRT-eligible project(s) enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> (projects targeting a pre-C#-8 framework are excluded — NRTs aren't available there). NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.
~0.1 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 1 suppression(s) across the 17443 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?

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 15 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (27%; ≈30% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 40 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

Dimension	WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria	Coverage
AC1 · Text alternatives	1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5	Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels	1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure	1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2	Partial signal
AC4 · Keyboard semantics	2.1.1, 2.4.3	Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness	4.1.2	Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety	1.4.3, 2.4.7	Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcement	enforcement — no page criterion	Enforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 40 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

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	60%	Adequate — gated by X4	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture	92%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	40%	Weak — gated by M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	16%	Critical — gated by D8, D9, D13, R4, R6, P1, P3	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	35%	Weak — gated by D29, D30, C2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility	40%	Weak — gated by AC2, AC4	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.

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.

SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 2 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.

Not evidenced — 2 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.

C4 Data Retention — Repo shows no data-retention / TTL / cleanup mechanism for personal data — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Define retention periods and a purge/cleanup job (or TTL) in code, or document where retention is enforced, so this dimension can be scored.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control

Not included — 39 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.

AX4 Dependency direction — not applicable to a transaction-script/CRUD architecture (the inward-dependency rule is for layered/clean styles)
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
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 — the dev server did not expose a crawlable HTTP endpoint in time — no runtime evidence 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.
D10 Test Quality — No tests were found in the analyzed repository to assess for quality.
D11 Test Reliability — No test suite was found to re-run, so reliability couldn't be assessed. Two searches produced that zero and both came back empty: the classifier that reads the loaded workspace recognised no suite it could run, and a walk of the source on disk — which covers the JS/TS `*.test.*` and `*.spec.*` conventions and probes for a Pester suite — found no test source in any other ecosystem either. Neither search reaches a suite that is missing from the loaded workspace and carries no name either walk recognises, so this is 'no suite found by those two searches', not a verdict that the repository has none.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Dependency hygiene not measured
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a C#/VB .NET solution, but this repository's production source is mostly .ts, which the C#/VB workspace does not load — the projects that loaded are an immaterial minority, so solution shape was not assessed for this repository. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's reach, not a verdict about this repository.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — small single-context codebase (2,378 production LoC in the .NET projects) — bounded contexts are not needed at this size No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling 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"]`.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — D27 reads resolved call sites in the languages it reads only — this repository's production source is .ts, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 1 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D34 Knowledge Freshness — too few commits to judge knowledge freshness
D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
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.
D39 IL Efficiency — IL not measured — the analyzer's build of the target did not succeed
D4 Code Duplication — This repository's production source (.ts) is not read by D4's token comparison, which compares .NET source: duplication in it is measured by R10 Code Duplication, the frontend lens's card running the same clone algorithm over the JS/TS token stream. Not scored here — read the R10 card for this repository's duplication.
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.
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (7 integration event(s))
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
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
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) 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
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
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 — 107 finding(s)

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×55

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 30 more in this group — see findings.md.

AC2 · Forms & labels · <input> without a programmatic label · ×33

<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.html:19 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.html:28 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-password/change-password.component.html:17 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-password/change-password.component.html:27 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-password/change-password.component.html:36 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/forgot-password/forgot-password.component.html:22 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/login/login.component.html:17 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/login/login.component.html:23 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/reset-password/reset-password.component.html:18 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/reset-password/reset-password.component.html:28 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.html:15 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.html:15 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.html:19 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.html:22 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.html:30 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.html:34 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.html:14 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.html:15 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.html:19 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.html:22 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label for>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.html:30 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.html:34 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.html:15 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.html:15 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
<input> without a programmatic label QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.html:15 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
+ 8 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · WriteOnlyPrivateField · ×7

WriteOnlyPrivateField QuickStart/Service/AccountService.cs:14 — private ILoggerManager _logger — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField QuickStart/Service/AuditService.cs:12 — private ILoggerManager _logger — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField REDACTED:18 — private ILoggerManager _logger — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField QuickStart/Service/CustomerService.cs:13 — private ILoggerManager _logger — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField QuickStart/Service/RoleService.cs:14 — private ILoggerManager _logger — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField QuickStart/Service/UserService.cs:14 — private ILoggerManager _logger — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField REDACTED:21 — private IConfiguration _configuration — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D13 · Secret Scanning · Leaked secret · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

AC1 · Text alternatives · <img> without a text alternative · ×1

<img> without a text alternative QuickStartUI/src/app/layouts/full/header/header.component.html:18 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.

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

REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High vulnerability · ×1

REDACTED

D8 · Code Coverage · No automated tests · ×1

No automated tests — No automated tests — no test code was found in this repository. Untested code is the largest single risk to changing it safely. Start with the code you change most often: add a suite in a framework a runner can collect (Vitest, Jest, Mocha, or the runtime's built-in runner (`node --test`, `bun test`, `deno test`)), and run it in CI so the gap cannot reopen.

S1 · Web-Security Posture · Cryptographic key material is a compile-time constant · ×1

Cryptographic key material is a compile-time constant QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/UserManagerServiceExtensions.cs:51 — The value is the token-signing key and is a compile-time constant, so the secret this operation depends on is published with the source. A key that ships with the source is not secret: every contributor, fork, mirror and released binary carries it, so anyone holding the repository can decrypt what any installation encrypted, and there is no way to invalidate what was already protected because every deployment built from this source shares the value. Where the constant is a password salt the consequence differs but is no smaller — one global salt means precomputation amortises across every installation, which is the property salting exists to destroy. Read the value from configuration, an environment variable or a secrets manager at startup and FAIL FAST when it is absent, so a missing key stops the process instead of silently falling back to a shared default; treat the committed value as disclosed and rotate it rather than only deleting the line. For a salt, generate a fresh random one per password and store it alongside the hash.

Serious — 173 finding(s)

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken · ×39

Async method without CancellationToken: ReadRequestBody QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/AuditLogMiddleware.cs:68 — No CancellationToken parameter, and the token `request.HttpContext.RequestAborted` carries reaches none of the calls here that take one — this work can't be stopped early once started. Pass `request.HttpContext.RequestAborted` on, or take a CancellationToken.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetAccountForCustomer REDACTED:17 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetAccountForCustomer REDACTED:24 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CreateAccountForCustomer REDACTED:32 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DeleteAccountForCustomer REDACTED:41 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: UpdateAccountForCustomer REDACTED:50 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetAudits REDACTED:16 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetMonthAsync REDACTED:23 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetTotalForSingleMonth REDACTED:31 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: RegisterUser REDACTED:17 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: Authenticate REDACTED:34 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ChangePassword REDACTED:47 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ChangeDefaultPassword REDACTED:62 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: forgetPassword REDACTED:77 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ResetPassword REDACTED:87 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetCustomers REDACTED:17 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetCustomer REDACTED:25 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CreateCustomer REDACTED:34 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DeleteCustomer REDACTED:43 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: UpdateCustomer REDACTED:52 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetRoles REDACTED:17 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CreateRole REDACTED:26 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: UpdateCustomer REDACTED:35 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DeleteRole REDACTED:43 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetRole REDACTED:51 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
+ 14 more in this group — see findings.md.

C2 · Access Controls · No authorization · ×30

No authorization — No [Authorize]/policies and no imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) were found — endpoints may be unprotected.
No authorization REDACTED:17 — `AccountController.GetAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:24 — `AccountController.GetAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:32 — `AccountController.CreateAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:41 — `AccountController.DeleteAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:50 — `AccountController.UpdateAccountForCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:16 — `AuditLogController.GetAudits` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:23 — `AuditLogController.GetMonthAsync` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:31 — `AuditLogController.GetTotalForSingleMonth` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:17 — `AuthenticationController.RegisterUser` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:34 — `AuthenticationController.Authenticate` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:47 — `AuthenticationController.ChangePassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:62 — `AuthenticationController.ChangeDefaultPassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:77 — `AuthenticationController.forgetPassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:87 — `AuthenticationController.ResetPassword` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:17 — `CustomerController.GetCustomers` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:25 — `CustomerController.GetCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:34 — `CustomerController.CreateCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:43 — `CustomerController.DeleteCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:52 — `CustomerController.UpdateCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:7 — `FallbackController.Index` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:17 — `RoleController.GetRoles` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:26 — `RoleController.CreateRole` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:35 — `RoleController.UpdateCustomer` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
No authorization REDACTED:43 — `RoleController.DeleteRole` serves requests and nothing authorizes it: no [Authorize] or RequireAuthorization on it or its controller/group, no fallback policy, no auth-gate middleware and no imperative guard in this codebase.
+ 5 more in this group — see findings.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×16

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D19 · Documentation Quality · Low XML-doc coverage · ×10

Low XML-doc coverage: QuickStart REDACTED — QuickStart: 4 % XML-doc coverage (1/26).
Low XML-doc coverage: Contracts QuickStart/Contracts/Contracts.csproj — Contracts: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/6).
Low XML-doc coverage: Entities REDACTED — Entities: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/49).
Low XML-doc coverage: LoggerService QuickStart/LoggerService/LoggerService.csproj — LoggerService: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/6).
Low XML-doc coverage: QuickStart.Presentation QuickStart/QuickStart.Presentation/QuickStart.Presentation.csproj — QuickStart.Presentation: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/47).
Low XML-doc coverage: Repository QuickStart/Repository/Repository.csproj — Repository: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/39).
Low XML-doc coverage: Service REDACTED — Service: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/47).
Low XML-doc coverage: Service.Contracts QuickStart/Service.Contracts/Service.Contracts.csproj — Service.Contracts: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/7).
Low XML-doc coverage: Shared QuickStart/Shared/Shared.csproj — Shared: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/99).
Low XML-doc coverage: EmailService REDACTED — EmailService: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/17).

D17 · Explicit Debt · Dead code · ×8

Dead code: AuditLogMiddleware QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/AuditLogMiddleware.cs:7 — NamedType AuditLogMiddleware — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including QuickStart, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: ConfigureExceptionHandler QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/ExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs:10 — Method ConfigureExceptionHandler — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including QuickStart, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: LogInfo QuickStart/Contracts/ILoggerManager.cs:5 — Method LogInfo — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Contracts, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: LogWarn QuickStart/Contracts/ILoggerManager.cs:6 — Method LogWarn — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Contracts, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: LogDebug QuickStart/Contracts/ILoggerManager.cs:7 — Method LogDebug — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Contracts, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: EmailConfirmationRequestDto QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/EmailConfirmationRequestDto.cs:3 — NamedType EmailConfirmationRequestDto — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Shared, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: TokenDto QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/TokenDto.cs:3 — NamedType TokenDto — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Shared, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: SendEmail QuickStart/EmailService/IEmailSender.cs:10 — Method SendEmail — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including EmailService, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.

AC4 · Keyboard semantics · Anchor without href · ×5

Anchor without href QuickStartUI/src/app/layouts/full/header/header.component.html:39 — An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action.
Anchor without href QuickStartUI/src/app/layouts/full/sidebar/nav-item/nav-item.component.html:4 — An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action.
Anchor without href QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.html:7 — An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action.
Anchor without href QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/login/login.component.html:7 — An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action.
Anchor without href QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/reset-password/reset-password.component.html:7 — An <a> with no href, role or tabindex isn't focusable or keyboard-activatable. Give it a real href, or use a <button> for an action.

AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard · ×3

Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:1 — `.mat-badge-content` moves (`transition: transform .2s ease-in-out`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce.
Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:1 — `.sidebarNav` moves (`transition: width .4s cubic-bezier(.25,.8,.25,1)`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce.
Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:5 — `.la-ball-clip-rotate>div` moves (`animation: ball-clip-rotate .75s linear infinite`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) · ×2

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:20 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:20 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:24 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/roles.component.ts:68 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/roles.component.ts:68 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/users.component.ts:72 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.

AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Focus outline removed in CSS without a · ×1

Focus outline removed in CSS without a :focus replacement QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/styles.fe309e3356ab7646.css:1 — `.cdk-visually-hidden` sets the outline to none/0 and no visible :focus / :focus-visible style for that element replaces it in this stylesheet, so a keyboard user cannot see where focus is. Draw a focus ring (outline, box-shadow or border) under :focus-visible.

AC7 · A11y enforcement · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1

Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (@angular-eslint/eslint-plugin-template (a11y rules)) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 32 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming conventions for retrieval operations. Some services use 'GetAll' for collections (ICustomerService, IUserService, IRoleService) while others use 'Get' (IAccountService). Additionally, singular retrieval uses 'Get' vs 'GetById'. There is also a typo in IAccountService.GetAccountsAync. · ×1

Inconsistent naming conventions for retrieval operations. Some services use 'GetAll' for collections (ICustomerService, IUserService, IRoleService) while others use 'Get' (IAccountService). Additionally, singular retrieval uses 'Get' vs 'GetById'. There is also a typo in IAccountService.GetAccountsAync. — Standardize collection retrieval to 'GetAll' or 'Get' across all services. Standardize single-item retrieval to 'GetById' or 'Get'. Fix typo 'GetAccountsAync' to 'GetAccountsAsync'. (signatures: IAccountService.GetAccountsAync | IAccountService.GetAccountAsync | ICustomerService.GetAllCustomersAsync | ICustomerService.GetCustomerAsync | IUserService.GetAllUsers | IUserService.GetUserById | IRoleService.GetAllRoles | IRoleService.GetRoleById | IAuditService.GetAuditLogsAsync)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming for creation and modification operations. 'Create' is used for IAccountService and ICustomerService, but 'Edit' is used for IRoleService. 'Update' is used for IUserService and ICustomerService. 'CreateAccountForCustomerAsync' implies a specific context not present in 'CreateCustomerAsync'. · ×1

Inconsistent naming for creation and modification operations. 'Create' is used for IAccountService and ICustomerService, but 'Edit' is used for IRoleService. 'Update' is used for IUserService and ICustomerService. 'CreateAccountForCustomerAsync' implies a specific context not present in 'CreateCustomerAsync'. — Standardize creation to 'Create' and modification to 'Update' across all services. Remove context-specific prefixes like 'ForCustomer' if the service scope already implies it, or ensure all services follow the same pattern. (signatures: IAccountService.CreateAccountForCustomerAsync | ICustomerService.CreateCustomerAsync | IUserService.UpdateUser | ICustomerService.UpdateCustomerAsync | IRoleService.EditRole)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · IAccountService methods include 'ForCustomer' in their names, implying a nested resource pattern, whereas ICustomerService methods do not include 'ForCustomer' (e.g., CreateCustomerAsync vs CreateAccountForCustomerAsync). This creates an inconsistent API surface for similar hierarchical relationships. · ×1

IAccountService methods include 'ForCustomer' in their names, implying a nested resource pattern, whereas ICustomerService methods do not include 'ForCustomer' (e.g., CreateCustomerAsync vs CreateAccountForCustomerAsync). This creates an inconsistent API surface for similar hierarchical relationships. — Either remove 'ForCustomer' from IAccountService methods to match ICustomerService, or add 'ForCustomer' to ICustomerService methods if the context requires explicit disambiguation. Given ICustomerService takes a customerId, the prefix is redundant. (signatures: IAccountService.UpdateAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.CreateAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.DeleteAccountForCustomerAsync)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · IAccountService has inconsistent parameter signatures compared to other services. It requires 'customerId' for all operations, while ICustomerService only requires 'customerId' for Get/Update/Delete but not Create. This inconsistency in required parameters for similar CRUD operations across services is confusing. · ×1

IAccountService has inconsistent parameter signatures compared to other services. It requires 'customerId' for all operations, while ICustomerService only requires 'customerId' for Get/Update/Delete but not Create. This inconsistency in required parameters for similar CRUD operations across services is confusing. — Review the necessity of 'customerId' in IAccountService. If accounts are always scoped to a customer, ensure the pattern is consistent with how other services handle scoped resources. Consider if IAccountService should be a sub-service of ICustomerService or if the API should be unified. (signatures: IAccountService.UpdateAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.CreateAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.DeleteAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.GetAccountAsync | IAccountService.GetAccountsAync)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · IAccountService uses 'trackChanges' as a boolean parameter for all methods, while ICustomerService also uses 'trackChanges' but IRoleService and IUserService do not. This inconsistency in tracking changes across services suggests a lack of unified data access strategy. · ×1

IAccountService uses 'trackChanges' as a boolean parameter for all methods, while ICustomerService also uses 'trackChanges' but IRoleService and IUserService do not. This inconsistency in tracking changes across services suggests a lack of unified data access strategy. — Either remove 'trackChanges' from all services if it is handled internally by a unit of work pattern, or standardize its presence across all services that require it. If it is necessary, ensure all services follow the same signature pattern. (signatures: IAccountService.UpdateAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.CreateAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.DeleteAccountForCustomerAsync | IAccountService.GetAccountAsync | IAccountService.GetAccountsAync)

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1

Off the main sequence: Entities REDACTED:1 — Entities: abstractness 0.13, instability 0.00, distance 0.88 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

P1 · CI/CD gates · No CI pipeline · ×1

No CI pipeline — No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplication concentrated across 4 sibling directories (11 clone groups) · ×1

Duplication concentrated across 4 sibling directories (11 clone groups) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:20 — 11 duplicated blocks under QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories audits, lists, roles, users — 8 of them are reported below, and 3 are counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 11 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 11 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 11 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (60 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block with local edits (60 matched lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:20 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts:20 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:13 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 406 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (51 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block with local edits (51 matched lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:26 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:26 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/update-user/update-user.component.ts:27 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 358 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (47 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block with local edits (47 matched lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:37 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:37 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/update-user/update-user.component.ts:40 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 278 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (41 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block with local edits (41 matched lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:22 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:22 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:26 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 273 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (30 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block with local edits (30 matched lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:14 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:14 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:14 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 219 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (29 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block with local edits (29 matched lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:25 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:25 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/reset-password/reset-password.component.ts:27 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 182 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (22 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (22 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:53 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:53 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:44 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 3 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (18 lines × 3 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:97 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:97 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/roles.component.ts:65 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/users.component.ts:68 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 5 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (16 lines × 5 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:32 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts:32 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts:28 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/update-role/update-role.component.ts:34 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:39 · +1 more site(s) not listed — the 5 copies are spread across 5 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:110 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/add-user/add-user.component.ts:110 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/update-user/update-user.component.ts:98 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:61 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:61 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-password/change-password.component.ts:61 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:68 — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/lists.component.ts:68 · QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/users/users.component.ts:86 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/core/error.interceptor.ts:6 — QuickStartUI/src/app/core/error.interceptor.ts:6 · QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/error-handler.service.ts:7 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) · ×1

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/authentication.service.ts:55 — QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/authentication.service.ts:55 · QuickStartUI/src/app/shared/services/authentication.service.ts:63 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.

R4 · Test Coverage · Test Coverage · ×1

Test Coverage — 0% of 50 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count

R6 · Tooling · No lint or typecheck script · ×1

No lint or typecheck script — test ✓ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~26 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~26 LoC) QuickStartUI/src/app/core/error.interceptor.ts — no import path from any entry point (1 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~4 LoC) · ×1

Dead file (~4 LoC) QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/chat-message.ts — no import path from any entry point (1 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make

R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@fortawesome/fontawesome-free' · ×1

Unused dependency '@fortawesome/fontawesome-free' — Declared in QuickStartUI/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.

R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@microsoft/signalr' · ×1

Unused dependency '@microsoft/signalr' — Declared in QuickStartUI/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.

R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency 'file-saver' · ×1

Unused dependency 'file-saver' — Declared in QuickStartUI/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.

SC1 · Supply-chain hygiene · NuGet dependencies are not locked · ×1

NuGet dependencies are not locked — No packages.lock.json and no central package management — restores aren't reproducible or pinned (SSDF PW.4.4). Enable <RestorePackagesWithLockFile>true</RestorePackagesWithLockFile> (commit the lockfile) or adopt Directory.Packages.props. Advisory — never scored.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it · ×1

Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/AuditLogMiddleware.cs:71 — `reader` is a `StreamReader`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 71). Every use of it in `ReadRequestBody` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var reader = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw.

X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped · Untrusted text written into markup unescaped · ×1

Untrusted text written into markup unescaped QuickStart/EmailService/EmailSender.cs:40 — `string.Format("<h2 style='color:red;'>{0}</h2>", message.Content)` is text this program did not author, and it is written into the text of an element through an HTML e-mail body with nothing encoding it for that place. Whoever controls the value controls the markup: it can close the element or attribute it sits in and open a script of its own. Encode it for HTML at this site, render it through the framework's escaping output, or sanitise it if it must stay markup.

Minor — 39 finding(s)

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Low CVE · ×8

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D24 · Comment Value · redundant comment · ×4

redundant comment QuickStart/EmailService/EmailSender.cs:75 — "log an error message or throw an exception, or both." — delete - the throw; already says exactly this
redundant comment REDACTED:19 — "throw new Exception("Exception");" — delete - restates the assignment and the thrown string is a magic constant
redundant comment QuickStart/Repository/RepositoryContext.cs:61 — "modelBuilder.ApplyConfiguration(new UserConfiguration());" — delete - Add a brief WHY line if this configuration has non-obvious ordering or dependency constraints
redundant comment QuickStart/Service.Contracts/IAuditService.cs:9 — "analysis" — delete - the comment is empty and explains nothing about the code

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Commented-out code · ×2

Commented-out code REDACTED:19 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).
Commented-out code QuickStart/Repository/RepositoryContext.cs:61 — A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers).

S1 · Web-Security Posture · No security response headers detected · ×2

No security response headers detected — None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is configured — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
No security response headers detected QuickStart/QuickStart/Program.cs:13 — This web host's pipeline is composed here and adds no security response header (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, a frame policy) to what it serves.

X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×2

Duplicated predicate QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts:45 — `this.dataForm?.get(controlName)?.invalid && this.dataForm?.get(controlName)?.touched` appears character-identically in 7 files — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-account/add-account.component.ts, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/add-customer/add-customer.component.ts, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/lists/update-customer/update-customer.component.ts, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/ui-components/roles/add-role/add-role.component.ts. 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 QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts:45 — `this.passwordForm.get(controlName).invalid && this.passwordForm.get(controlName).touched` appears character-identically in 2 files — QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-defualt-password/change-defualt-password.component.ts, QuickStartUI/src/app/pages/authentication/change-password/change-password.component.ts. 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.

X4 · Structured logging · Interpolated log message defeats structured logging · ×2

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging QuickStart/QuickStart/Extensions/ExceptionMiddlewareExtensions.cs:22 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging QuickStart/QuickStart/GlobalExceptionHandler.cs:32 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) 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.

C5 · Data-Subject Rights · Partial data-subject-rights support · ×1

Partial data-subject-rights support — Corroborated rights: erasure ✓ · export ✗ · consent ✗. Each tick means this scan found code in the repository implementing that right — a deletion/anonymisation path for erasure, a data-export or portability path for export, and consent state recorded alongside the personal data it authorises. A ✗ therefore means no such code was recognised HERE, not that the right is unsupported: a capability provided by a platform, a manual runbook, or code spelled in a way this scan does not match is not visible to it. Confirm before treating a cross as a gap; where it is one, the right has to be fulfilled manually.

D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent spelling of the suffix 'Async' in method names. 'GetAccountsAync' uses a typo ('Aync') while other similar async methods ('GetAuditLogsAsync', 'GetAccountsAsync') correctly use 'Async'. · ×1

Inconsistent spelling of the suffix 'Async' in method names. 'GetAccountsAync' uses a typo ('Aync') while other similar async methods ('GetAuditLogsAsync', 'GetAccountsAsync') correctly use 'Async'. — Rename 'GetAccountsAync' to 'GetAccountsAsync' to match the correct spelling used in the rest of the codebase. (symbols: Method: public Task<IEnumerable<AccountDto>> Service.AccountService.GetAccountsAync(System.Guid, bool), Method: public Task<IEnumerable<AuditLogDto>> Service.Contracts.IAuditService.GetAuditLogsAsync(bool), Method: public Task<IEnumerable<AuditLogDto>> Service.AuditService.GetAuditLogsAsync(bool), Method: public Task<IEnumerable<Account>> Repository.AccountRepository.GetAccountsAsync(System.Guid, bool))

D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent casing convention for entity properties. Most properties in the Customer entity (Country, Address, LastName) use PascalCase, but 'status' uses camelCase. This breaks the naming convention for the domain model. · ×1

Inconsistent casing convention for entity properties. Most properties in the Customer entity (Country, Address, LastName) use PascalCase, but 'status' uses camelCase. This breaks the naming convention for the domain model. — Rename 'status' to 'Status' to align with the PascalCase convention used by other properties in the Customer entity. (symbols: Property: public bool Entities.Models.Customer.status, Property: public string? Entities.Models.Customer.Country, Property: public string? Entities.Models.Customer.Address, Property: public string? Entities.Models.Customer.LastName)

D9 · Test Distribution · No tests found · ×1

No tests found — No test suite could be collected — no discoverable tests to count. If this repository does test, wiring the suite to a framework a runner can collect (Vitest, Jest, Mocha, or the runtime's built-in runner (`node --test`, `bun test`, `deno test`)) is what makes it countable here; a pipeline step that invokes a runner is not evidence on its own, because a runner over an empty suite passes. Tests written as plain executables or shell/PowerShell harnesses are not collectible this way and are not scored here.

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.

M2 · Architecture documentation · No architecture diagram/doc · ×1

No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.

M3 · Folder & project structure · No src/ separation · ×1

No src/ separation — Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.

M3 · Folder & project structure · Inconsistent root namespaces · ×1

Inconsistent root namespaces — Only 2/10 projects share a common root namespace — the code's module identity is inconsistent.

P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1

No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No release approval gate · ×1

No release approval gate — Deployment is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever reaches the release trigger goes to production unreviewed, so a mistaken merge or tag is live before anyone can stop it.

P6 · Release Hygiene · No changelog · ×1

No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)

R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'yearlyChart' · ×1

Unused export 'yearlyChart' QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/chart.ts:18 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.

R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'monthlyChart' · ×1

Unused export 'monthlyChart' QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/chart.ts:29 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.

R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'EmailConfirmationDto' · ×1

Unused export 'EmailConfirmationDto' QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/user.ts:1 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.

R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'User' · ×1

Unused export 'User' QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/user.ts:41 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.

R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserDetailsDto' · ×1

Unused export 'UserDetailsDto' QuickStartUI/src/app/_interface/user.ts:49 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.

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

Not all async methods take a CancellationToken — Only 1/60 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 · Nullable reference types not enabled everywhere · ×1

Nullable reference types not enabled everywhere — 9/10 NRT-eligible project(s) enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> (projects targeting a pre-C#-8 framework are excluded — NRTs aren't available there). NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.

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

Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score — ~0.1 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 1 suppression(s) across the 17443 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 — 1 finding(s)

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1

Off the main sequence: Shared QuickStart/Shared/Shared.csproj:1 — Shared: abstractness 0.07, instability 0.00, distance 0.93 — the shape a shared-kernel / building-block library has BY DESIGN — concrete and widely depended-on is what makes it useful, and this dimension does not penalise it (the distance is reported for completeness, not as a defect). Worth a look only if it has grown past one coherent kernel into an everything-bucket.

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-b7c077a1c29841b2b57734e3c0c05284/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-b7c077a1c29841b2b57734e3c0c05284/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 .	25	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	dotnet	—	dotnet list QuickStart/QuickStart.sln package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json	87	artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.	0	—
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 1 file(s) — `QuickStart/QuickStart/wwwroot/8.fc417176847dac24.js` — 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 — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.	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	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a161f4-9788-72d3-b61c-9c5c5ae3af52 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Appendix C — Personal-data map

Every field, property and record parameter whose name is conventional personal data — 27 field(s) across 3 categories, each with an exact repo-relative file:line. This is the data inventory a compliance review starts from — right-to-erasure, retention, minimisation. Detected by NAME, from the C# syntax tree, with a deliberately specific identifier classifier — the same one the C1–C5 compliance cards use to decide whether personal data is present, so CardDefinition or FileName don't trip. Two caveats stated rather than glossed: those cards additionally require corroboration (a persistence/account signal, or two distinct PII categories) that this inventory deliberately does not, so it lists more than they gate on; and D32 Data Compliance shares nothing with it — that dimension is a separate semgrep ruleset for personal data leaking into logs, URLs and browser storage, and a clean D32 result says nothing about this list. Informational — it feeds no score.

Name — 14 field(s)

User.FirstName QuickStart/Entities/Identity/User.cs:7
User.LastName QuickStart/Entities/Identity/User.cs:8
Customer.FirstName QuickStart/Entities/Models/Customer.cs:12
Customer.LastName QuickStart/Entities/Models/Customer.cs:14
UserForRegistrationDto.FirstName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/UserForRegistrationDto.cs:7
UserForRegistrationDto.LastName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/UserForRegistrationDto.cs:8
CustomerDto.FirstName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Customer/CustomerDto.cs:6
CustomerDto.LastName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Customer/CustomerDto.cs:7
CustomerForManipulationDto.FirstName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Customer/CustomerForManipulationDto.cs:5
CustomerForManipulationDto.LastName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Customer/CustomerForManipulationDto.cs:6
UserDto.FirstName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/User/UserDto.cs:7
UserDto.LastName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/User/UserDto.cs:8
UserForUpdateDto.FirstName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/User/UserForUpdateDto.cs:6
UserForUpdateDto.LastName QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/User/UserForUpdateDto.cs:7

Email — 10 field(s)

EmailSender._emailConfig QuickStart/EmailService/EmailSender.cs:12
AuditLog.UserEmail QuickStart/Entities/Models/AuditLog.cs:6
ChangePasswordDto.Email QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/ChangePasswordDto.cs:11
EmailConfirmationRequestDto.Email QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/EmailConfirmationRequestDto.cs:5
ForgotPasswordDto.Email QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/ForgotPasswordDto.cs:10
ResetPasswordDto.Email QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/ResetPasswordDto.cs:11
UserForRegistrationDto.Email QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Authentication/UserForRegistrationDto.cs:12
UserDto.Email QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/User/UserDto.cs:9
UserDto.EmailConfirmed QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/User/UserDto.cs:10
UserForUpdateDto.Email QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/User/UserForUpdateDto.cs:8

Date of birth — 3 field(s)

Customer.DateOfBirth QuickStart/Entities/Models/Customer.cs:16
CustomerDto.DateOfBirth QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Customer/CustomerDto.cs:8
CustomerForManipulationDto.DateOfBirth QuickStart/Shared/DataTransferObjects/Customer/CustomerForManipulationDto.cs:7

Findings by how serious they are

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 60% · Adequate · gated by X4 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 92% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 40% · Weak · gated by M2 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 16% · Critical · gated by D8, D9, D13, R4, R6, P1, P3 ·

At a glance — Security · 35% · Weak · gated by D29, D30, C2 ·

At a glance — Accessibility · 40% · Weak · gated by AC2, AC4 ·

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

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

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Appendix C — Personal-data map

Downloadable artifacts