ALVR — Watchdog Audit

Executive summary

The system holds an adequate standing with a health score of 66%, indicating a workable asset that carries real operational risk. While the architecture is robust, the overall maturity and security posture require attention to prevent future delivery delays and cost overruns. This assessment reflects a medium-sized codebase where the cost of inaction begins to outweigh the effort of remediation.

The value at stake is significant, with over thirty thousand lines of production code representing a rebuild effort of roughly three months for a single engineer. Despite the modest size, the composition suggests a complex logic layer where changes ripple through the system. The cost to rebuild is approximately thirty-nine thousand euros, but the true expense lies in the ongoing drag on development velocity caused by technical debt.

The most critical risk is a hidden velocity tax on every change. Code quality signals indicate that modifications in weaker areas cost three to six percent more effort than in clean code. This inefficiency compounds annually, creating a recurring bill that pays for itself through lost engineering capacity. Addressing the top-ranked fix breaks even within a year, making it the highest-leverage action available.

A second major theme is the gap between architectural strength and operational maturity. While the system’s structure is sound, its maturity score of sixty-one percent reveals a lack of institutional knowledge and documentation. This creates a dependency on specific individuals and increases the risk of errors during onboarding or incident response. The absence of recorded decisions means new teams cannot easily understand the context behind past choices, slowing down future development.

What is genuinely good is the system’s architectural integrity and event-driven design, which provide a stable foundation for change. The high scores in architecture and event sourcing indicate that the core logic is well-structured and scalable. These strengths should be preserved while addressing the documentation and code quality gaps.

Focus first on recording significant decisions in a centralized location. This low-effort action provides immediate clarity and reduces the velocity tax by aligning the team on context. It is the single most effective step to protect the investment and improve long-term delivery speed.

Code Health 78% Adequate · gated by D2 Architecture 98% ★ Exemplary Maturity 61% Adequate · gated by M2 Readiness 66% Adequate · gated by P7 Security 63% Adequate · gated by D29, D36 Event Sourcing 100% ★ Exemplary Performance 100% ★ Exemplary

How the score is built — each lens's share of the headline Width is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.

Maturity 61% · 46% weightSecurity 63% · 25% weightReadiness 66% · 14% weightCode Health 78% · 8% weightArchitecture 98% · 4% weightEvent Sourcing 100% · 2% weightPerformance 100% · 1% weight

Raise Maturity 61 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 66 → ~69.

Code composition — where the lines go

Tests 100%

New since the last scan (17+)

17 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-13) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

D1 · EyeTrackedFoveation::update (cyclomatic 23) alvr/server_openvr/src/foveated_encoding.rs
D2 · EyeTrackedFoveation::update (cognitive 41) alvr/server_openvr/src/foveated_encoding.rs
D5 · Unstable project alvr_server_core
D5 · Off the main sequence: alvr_filesystem
D5 · Off the main sequence: alvr_common
D5 · Off the main sequence: alvr_packets
D5 · Off the main sequence: alvr_session
D22 · Inconsistent naming convention for C API conversions. Most pairs use 'to_capi_' and 'from_capi_' prefixes, but the module itself is named 'c_api'. While this is internally consistent within the module, it differs from common Rust FFI patterns (e.g., 'into_*'/'from_*' or 'to_*'/'from_*') and creates a slight cognitive load compared to standard library conventions. More critically, the existence of both `AlvrFov` (C API) and `Fov` (Primitives) with identical structures suggests a lack of a unified type system for cross-boundary data, forcing manual conversion functions for every primitive type.
D22 · Redundant and confusingly named logging/error reporting functions. `show_warn` and `show_err` both take a `Result` and return `T`, implying they unwrap and log. `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` take an error type `E`. The distinction between `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` is unclear without documentation (is it debug-only? does it include backtrace?). Similarly, the distinction between `show_err` and `show_e` is ambiguous: does one handle `Result` and the other raw errors? If so, why not name them `log_result` and `log_error`? The presence of `_blocking` variants suggests async context, but the non-blocking variants don't specify their execution context clearly.
D22 · Duplicate intent between `VideoStreamingCapabilities` and `ClientCapabilities`. Both types contain nearly identical properties: `default_view_resolution`, `max_view_resolution`, `refresh_rates`, `foveated_encoding`, `encoder_high_profile`, `encoder_10_bits`, `encoder_av1`, `prefer_10bit`, `preferred_encoding_gamma`, `prefer_hdr`. `VideoStreamingCapabilities` is used in network packets, while `ClientCapabilities` is used in the core client context. This duplication increases maintenance burden and risk of desync.
D22 · Three different types represent the same negotiated streaming configuration. `ClientNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in packets, `ServerNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in server core, and `AlvrNegotiatedConfig` is in the server C API. They share fields like `view_resolution`, `refresh_rate`, `foveated_encoding`, `codec`, etc. This tripartite duplication is a significant consistency issue.
D30 · REDACTED
D35 · Change coupling: connection.rs ↔ props.rs alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs
D35 · Change coupling: main.rs ↔ lib.rs alvr/client_mock/src/main.rs
D35 · Change coupling: connection.rs ↔ hand_gestures.rs alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs
D44 · End-of-life runtime: Rust 1.97
P7 · Outbound HTTP without resilience alvr/launcher/src/actions.rs

A full-fidelity diff against the previous run's complete recorded findings — line-move tolerant: a finding that only shifted line counts as unchanged, only genuinely new titles/files surface here.

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €13,000–€64,000

Cost to rebuild	€13,000–€64,000 (0.1–0.4 person-years (213–677 h), ~1 engineer)
Domain complexity	Standard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor	0.9× (at 66% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape	Medium · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~0.3 person-years of build effort (about ~€39,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Maturity at 61% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.0) — standard service × a 0.9× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

The highest-leverage moves; the full ranked list is in the Roadmap below.

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

+4.6 pts · Low effort · ADR Quality

Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).

+5.0 pts · Medium effort · Architecture documentation

Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.

+3.6 pts · Medium effort · Documentation (README)

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

The top fix pays for itself · High · Economics

The top-ranked fix costs roughly 1–3 engineer-days once. Not doing it costs about 0.6–3.8 engineer-days every year, paid as drag on the ~10,029 lines this team changes annually — a bill that arrives whether or not anyone books it. On those figures the fix breaks even in roughly 3–57 months and is free after that. Method, stated so this is not read as a quotation: debt from the ranked task's effort band; interest = annual changed lines (measured, annualised from the 90-day window) ÷ an ASSUMED 150–400 lines per engineer-day × the 3–6% drag implied by the code-quality signals; breaking point = debt ÷ annual interest. A modelled planning range built from measured inputs and one named assumption — not a quotation, a valuation, or a certified figure.

Evidence: D15 churn: 2,473 line(s) changed over a 90-day window ⇒ ~10,029/year · D1/D2/D4/D6 code quality: averaging 7.0/10 ⇒ a 3–6% drag on each change · top-ranked remediation: Low effort ⇒ about 1–3 engineer-day(s)

→ Do the top-ranked fix now if this code will still be yours in 57 months.

Value concentrated against a weak lens · Medium · Value at risk

This is a Medium asset (~0.3 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Maturity at 61%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.

Evidence: valuation: Medium, ~0.3 person-years rebuild (31,166 LoC) · weakest lens: Maturity 61%

→ Direct remediation budget at Maturity first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.

Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage

Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form). The rest can wait behind it.

Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort

→ Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).

A velocity tax on every change · Medium · Economics

The code-quality signals (complexity, duplication, cohesion) average 7.0/10, which acts as a tax on every change in the weaker areas: modifications there plausibly cost on the order of 3–6% more than in clean code, and the tax compounds as the codebase grows. (A modelled estimate, not a measured fact.)

Evidence: D1/D2/D4/D6 code quality: averaging 7.0/10 across the code-quality signals actually measured

→ Pay it down where churn is highest — the hotspots — not everywhere; that's where the tax is actually paid.

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 — module dependency matrix

Rows and columns are the same modules, ordered so that a module only depends on ones above it. A cell means the row depends on the column, and its number is how many type pairs create that dependency. Read one thing: is anything above the diagonal? A mark there is a dependency cycle. (A cycle is all this shows — an unusual but cycle-free dependency sits below the diagonal like any other.)

139 modules, 227 dependencies. 3 dependency cycles across 9 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 99 more are not drawn.

Module dependency matrix. The row depends on the column; the number is how many type pairs create the dependency. A cell above the diagonal is part of a dependency cycle.
depends on →	1 alvr_adb.parse	2 alvr_common	3 alvr_common.logging	4 alvr_common.primitives	5 alvr_filesystem	6 alvr_launcher.ui	7 alvr_system_info	8 alvr_common.c_api	9 alvr_graphics	10 alvr_session.settings	12 alvr_client_core.video_decoder.android	13 alvr_graphics.lobby	14 alvr_session	15 alvr_sockets.control_socket	16 alvr_sockets.stream_socket	19 alvr_client_core.video_decoder	20 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.devices	21 alvr_graphics.stream	22 alvr_packets	23 alvr_client_core.statistics	24 alvr_client_openxr.interaction	25 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.settings_controls	26 alvr_events	28 alvr_server_io	29 alvr_client_core.connection	31 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.logs	32 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.settings	33 alvr_dashboard.data_sources	34 alvr_client_core	35 alvr_dashboard.dashboard	38 alvr_server_core.tracking
1 alvr_adb.parse
2 alvr_common
3 alvr_common.logging
4 alvr_common.primitives
5 alvr_filesystem
6 alvr_launcher.ui
7 alvr_system_info
8 alvr_common.c_api				3
9 alvr_graphics	2			2
10 alvr_session.settings			2				1
11 alvr_adb					1		2			1
12 alvr_client_core.video_decoder.android		2								1						2
13 alvr_graphics.lobby	1			3					1
14 alvr_session	1					1				1
15 alvr_sockets.control_socket										2
16 alvr_sockets.stream_socket										3
17 alvr_audio	1									3					2
18 alvr_client_core.audio	1									1					2
19 alvr_client_core.video_decoder										1	2
20 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.devices	1												1																	2
21 alvr_graphics.stream				1				2	1	4					1
22 alvr_packets				1		1		1		6			1
23 alvr_client_core.statistics																			2
24 alvr_client_openxr.interaction				3			2		1	2									3
25 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.settings_controls																			4
26 alvr_events																			2
27 alvr_server_core.hand_gestures				2						1									1
28 alvr_server_io										2			3						2
29 alvr_client_core.connection	1	1												1	1					1									1
30 alvr_client_openxr.lobby							1		1			1									1
31 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.logs										1													1
32 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.settings																						1								1
33 alvr_dashboard.data_sources		1																					2	1						1
34 alvr_client_core		1					2												2						1
35 alvr_dashboard.dashboard													1				1									1	1	1
36 alvr_dashboard.dashboard.components.settings_controls.section																			1			2				1
37 alvr_server_core.connection		1								1			1	1					2						1
38 alvr_server_core.tracking				3						3					1										1
39 alvr_client_openxr.stream		2						1	1	5								1	2		3								3
40 alvr_server_core		1		1	1			1		4			1		1				2	1					2						2

Dependency, pointing down the layeringAbove the diagonal — part of a cycleThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 78% · Adequate · gated by D2 ·

The Good

D3 · Rust God Classes 7.3 D4 · Rust Code Duplication 9.6 D17 · Rust Explicit Debt 9.7

The Bad

D1 · Rust Cyclomatic Complexity 5.4

The Ugly

D2 · Rust Cognitive Complexity 2.9

At a glance — Architecture · 98% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Rust Coupling 8.5 D6 · Rust Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D26 · Rust Project Cohesion 10.0 D35 · Rust Change Coupling 9.4 AX10 · Repo Code composition 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

The Ugly

D22 · Rust Internal API Consistency 4.0

At a glance — Maturity · 61% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good

D15 · Rust Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.3 D16 · Rust Bus Factor 9.0 D21 · Rust Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Rust Knowledge Freshness 9.7 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.9 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Bad

D19 · Rust Documentation Quality 6.0

The Ugly

D20 · Rust ADR Quality 0.0 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Adequate · gated by P7 ·

The Good

D9 · Rust Test Distribution 10.0 D12 · Rust Dependency Hygiene 8.7 D13 · Rust Secret Scanning 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 7.5 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 7.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 7.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

The Ugly

P7 · Repo Outbound HTTP resilience 3.0

At a glance — Security · 63% · Adequate · gated by D29, D36 ·

The Good

D28 · Rust Secrets (history) 10.0 D31 · Rust IaC & Container Security 7.0 D43 · Rust Malicious Dependencies 10.0

The Bad

D30 · Rust Dependency Vulnerabilities 6.3 D44 · Rust Platform End-of-Life 6.0

The Ugly

D29 · Rust Static Analysis (SAST) 2.0 D36 · Rust Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 2.5

At a glance — Event Sourcing · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good

ES1 · Repo Fold determinism 10.0 ES2 · Repo Immutable events 10.0

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
A03:2021 — Injection	72	High / Critical
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components	15	High / Critical
A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration	12	High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by establishing a centralized architecture documentation hub to record significant design decisions and their consequences, ensuring all architectural context is preserved and discoverable. Simultaneously, enhance system resilience by enforcing request timeouts on all outbound HTTP clients and implementing retry logic with back-off for transient failures. Finally, broaden security coverage by configuring Dependabot to monitor GitHub Actions and git submodules, and update the root README to include a high-level overview of how the system works.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.	+4.6 pts	Low	ADR Quality
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).	+5.0 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.	+3.6 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)
Give every client a whole-request bound: `reqwest::Client::builder().timeout(Duration::from_secs(10))` (never `reqwest::get` or `Client::new()`, which have none), ureq's `timeout_global`, or wrap the call in `tokio::time::timeout`; add retry with back-off (`reqwest-retry`'s `RetryTransientMiddleware`, `backoff`) around dependencies that fail.	+3.2 pts	Medium	Outbound HTTP resilience
Dependabot is configured but does not watch `github-actions`, `gitsubmodule` — add those `package-ecosystem` entries to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.	+3.0 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
Improve Documentation Quality — currently 6.0/10.	+2.8 pts	Medium	Documentation Quality
Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.	+2.6 pts	Medium	Observability
Resolve the 5 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (4), REDACTED.	+1.2 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 75 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 4% slop · 60% mixed · 36% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	0.7	Slop	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	1.6	Slop	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.0	Slop	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs	5.5	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: alvr_server_core::input_mapping::automatic_bindings (cyclomatic 67)
alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/xtask/src/main.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/audio/src/lib.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
alvr/server_core/src/tracking/body.rs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment

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 — 81

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 — 216

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 — 33

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

Could not be resolved — 47

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. 39 of 43 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 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 — 43 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D12D13D15D16D17D19D20D21D22D26D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D43D44AX10AX3AX4AX9ES1ES2M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P6P7PF3

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, 286 of 330 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a0ecb3-cf5b-7612-997c-d7631b15f2da.

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.

D8 Code Coverage — 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. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.rs) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) 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. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) 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 — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — 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. Test source is present (.rs) and this repository declares a Cargo test suite (repository root, 2 test files), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D14 License Compliance — 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. License Compliance couldn't be assessed within its 15-minute budget on a solution this large — not included in this run.
AX1 Captive dependencies — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX2 Stateful singletons — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX6 Interface segregation — 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 is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
C1 Data Protection — 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. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
C2 Access Controls — 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. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — 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. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — 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. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — 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. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
ED5 Idempotency — 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 finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P10 Library API & versioning — 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 reads NuGet packaging and C# public API only, and no .NET project was loaded for this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
P5 DR & Backup — 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. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
PF1 Benchmark discipline — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
PF2 Allocation 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. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
S1 Web-Security Posture — 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. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X14 Bypassable address classification — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X2 Cancellation propagation — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X20 Mistyped argument guard — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X22 Contradicted release guard — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X25 Inert configuration knob — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X3 Exception handling — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X4 Structured logging — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 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 is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

Repo exclusion declarations: 9 pattern(s) declared (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code) excluded 0 source file(s) from code-quality scoring. Declarations are the repo's own visible statement that a tree is machine-written or vendored — auditable in any diff, honored by GitHub the same way.

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
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").
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.
D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
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.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
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.
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.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
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.
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.
AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
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 (4): D19, D21, D22, 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 Complexity5.4 / 10Adequate✓ 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 5.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

30 function(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline at 87. A further 3 function(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being Platform::fmt at 26 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 1 file carries no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of its over-threshold functions was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: alvr/system_info/src/lib.rs (Platform::fmt at 26). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cyclomatic 87) · ×7alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555

alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props (cyclomatic 55) · ×3alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs:196

alvr_client_openxr::entry_point (cyclomatic 49) · ×3alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:160

alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cyclomatic 53) · ×2alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:124

InteractionContext::select_sources (cyclomatic 23) · ×2alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:503

+ 13 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 7 alvr_server_core finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with connection.rs (3), input_mapping.rs (2), mod.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 alvr_server_openvr finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with props.rs (2), lib.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 alvr_client_openxr finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with lib.rs, stream.rs, interaction.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D2 · Cognitive Complexity2.9 / 10Weak✓ 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 2.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

45 function(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline at 152.

alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cognitive 152) · ×7alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555

Control::ui (cognitive 37) · ×6alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:46

alvr_client_openxr::entry_point (cognitive 101) · ×3alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:160

alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props (cognitive 87) · ×3alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs:196

alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cognitive 79) · ×2alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:124

+ 21 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 7 alvr_server_core finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with connection.rs (2), input_mapping.rs (2), mod.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 Control finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with dictionary.rs, section.rs, number.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 alvr_client_openxr finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with lib.rs, interaction.rs, stream.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D3 · God Classes7.3 / 10Strong✓ 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 7.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

27 over-large unit(s) detected — types, modules or files that carry too much.

FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline · ×12alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555

MethodTooLong: DataSources.new · ×10alvr/dashboard/src/data_sources.rs:129

FileTooLong: src/connection.rs · ×5alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs

What to do

Resolve the 12 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with connection.rs (4), lib.rs (4), props.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 warning-level).
Resolve the 10 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with stream.rs (3), data_sources.rs, interaction.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (10 warning-level).
Resolve the 5 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with connection.rs, interaction.rs, c_api.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.6 / 10Stronggated by 28 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

27 duplicated block group(s) detected. One further row reports members as variants of one another; it aggregates block groups already counted above and is not itself counted.

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×5alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:564

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×4alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs:166

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×2alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:98

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×2alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs:40

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×2alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:496

+ 12 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 5 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with c_api.rs (2), connection.rs, actions.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with c_api.rs, lobby.rs, mod.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with dictionary.rs, optional.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling8.5 / 10Strong✓ 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 8.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

22 production modules (Cargo), 0 dependency cycle(s), 1 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 4 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 19 of the 22 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, or have no source directory of their own).

Off the main sequence: alvr_filesystem · ×4

Unstable project alvr_server_core

What to do

Resolve the 4 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Unstable project alvr_server_core finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 55 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

12 test methods: 12 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Rust suite contributes 12 `#[test]` function(s) across 2 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 0 of those file(s) are integration-test targets under a crate's tests/ directory, and the rest are #[test] functions compiled into the crate they test.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D12 · Dependency Hygiene~~8.8~~ 8.7 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.

Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 99% · ceiling Verified

24 outdated, 0 yanked direct Cargo dependencies. 72 of 73 direct crates were graded against crates.io (0 not published there, 1 not resolved by a committed REDACTED). Only DIRECT edges are graded: a transitive crate cannot be moved past what its parent's requirement admits, so reporting one would be advice its owner cannot take. A newer release is reported only where this repository's OWN requirement already admits it, so the remedy is `cargo update` and never a manifest edit — which means a release outside the declared range is deliberately NOT charged, because a written-down constraint is a decision rather than a defect. Note that a bare requirement is a CARET, and for a 0.x crate its ceiling is the minor. Whether any crate is UNMAINTAINED is not graded — crates.io publishes no maintenance status, and release age does not stand in for one. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question, read from REDACTED there.

Outdated: anyhow · ×24

What to do

Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D13 · Secret Scanning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots9.3 / 10Stronggated by 3 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Top hotspots: alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs (3×87=261); alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs (4×39=156); alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs (2×38=76)

Hotspot: alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs · ×3alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555

What to do

Resolve the 3 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with connection.rs, lib.rs, mod.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D16 · Bus Factor9.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").

Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.

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

10 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is alvr/dashboard/src/data_sources.rs. Counted over 98 of the 142 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1

What to do

Resolve the 1 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt9.7 / 10Stronggated by 43 serious findings✓ 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 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

43 deducted task-comment markers across 31166 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.7. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×39alvr/audio/src/linux.rs:330

FixmeComment · ×3alvr/audio/src/linux.rs:76

HackCommentalvr/client_openxr/src/extra_extensions/passthrough_fb.rs:61

What to do

Resolve the 39 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with lib.rs (8), c_api.rs (3), android.rs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (39 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 FixmeComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with linux.rs, linux_steamvr.rs, lib.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 HackComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with passthrough_fb.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityAdequate◐ 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 Adequate / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The repository's root README (ALVR - Air Light VR) gives a strong overview and lists direct download links for Windows/Linux launchers, plus compatibility tables for Apple Vision Pro, Quest, Pico Neo, Play For Dream YVR, Vive Focus 3/Vision/XR Elite, PhoneVR, Android/Monado, Lynx R1, and Oculus Go. It also notes the missing status of the old SteamVR repo for Oculus Go. The READMEs for alvr/client_core/README.md through alvr/vulkan_layer/README.md are directory-specific (alvr_common, alvr_gui, etc.) with no repository-level overview or installation guidance. A dedicated architecture/design doc is absent.

What to do

Improve Documentation Quality — currently 6.0/10. — The repository's root README (ALVR - Air Light VR) gives a strong overview and lists direct download links for Windows/Linux launchers, plus compatibility tables for Apple Vision Pro, Quest, Pico Neo, Play For Dream YVR, Vive Focus 3/Vision/XR Elite, PhoneVR, Android/Monado, Lynx R1, and Oculus Go. It also notes the missing status of the old SteamVR repo for Oculus Go. The READMEs for alvr/client_core/README.md through alvr/vulkan_layer/README.md are directory-specific (alvr_common, alvr_gui, etc.) with no repository-level overview or installation guidance. A dedicated architecture/design doc is absent.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.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

4 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 237 exposed types.

Inconsistent naming convention for C API conversions. Most pairs use 'to_capi_' and 'from_capi_' prefixes, but the module itself is named 'c_api'. While this is internally consistent within the module, it differs from common Rust FFI patterns (e.g., 'into_*'/'from_*' or 'to_*'/'from_*') and creates a slight cognitive load compared to standard library conventions. More critically, the existence of both `AlvrFov` (C API) and `Fov` (Primitives) with identical structures suggests a lack of a unified type system for cross-boundary data, forcing manual conversion functions for every primitive type.

Redundant and confusingly named logging/error reporting functions. `show_warn` and `show_err` both take a `Result` and return `T`, implying they unwrap and log. `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` take an error type `E`. The distinction between `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` is unclear without documentation (is it debug-only? does it include backtrace?). Similarly, the distinction between `show_err` and `show_e` is ambiguous: does one handle `Result` and the other raw errors? If so, why not name them `log_result` and `log_error`? The presence of `_blocking` variants suggests async context, but the non-blocking variants don't specify their execution context clearly.

Duplicate intent between `VideoStreamingCapabilities` and `ClientCapabilities`. Both types contain nearly identical properties: `default_view_resolution`, `max_view_resolution`, `refresh_rates`, `foveated_encoding`, `encoder_high_profile`, `encoder_10_bits`, `encoder_av1`, `prefer_10bit`, `preferred_encoding_gamma`, `prefer_hdr`. `VideoStreamingCapabilities` is used in network packets, while `ClientCapabilities` is used in the core client context. This duplication increases maintenance burden and risk of desync.

Three different types represent the same negotiated streaming configuration. `ClientNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in packets, `ServerNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in server core, and `AlvrNegotiatedConfig` is in the server C API. They share fields like `view_resolution`, `refresh_rate`, `foveated_encoding`, `codec`, etc. This tripartite duplication is a significant consistency issue.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming convention for C API conversions. Most pairs use… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Redundant and confusingly named logging/error reporting functions.… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Duplicate intent between `VideoStreamingCapabilities` and… 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?

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 22 build units (Cargo) 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)2.0 / 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 2.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

72 finding(s): 0 critical, 71 high, 1 medium, 0 low. 62 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 33 file(s) — `alvr/server_openvr/cpp/alvr_server/nvEncodeAPI.h` (line 212, line 216, line 220, …), `alvr/server_openvr/cpp/shared/amf/public/common/AMFMath.h` (line 327, line 947), `alvr/server_openvr/cpp/shared/amf/public/common/AMFSTL.h`, `alvr/server_openvr/cpp/shared/amf/public/common/CPUCaps.h` (line 143, line 144, line 145, …), `alvr/server_openvr/cpp/shared/amf/public/common/DataStream.h` (line 83), … (+28 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 1 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED

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

What to do

Resolve the 5 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (4), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-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).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 62 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (62 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities6.3 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

15 finding(s): 0 critical, 2 high, 13 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 2 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
Resolve the 6 Medium vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 Medium advisory (unmaintained) finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security7.0 / 10Adequategated by 8 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

12 finding(s): 0 critical, 8 high, 3 medium, 1 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 8 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 issue-level).
Resolve the 3 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Low IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D34 · Knowledge Freshness9.7 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

3 of 98 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is alvr/server_core/src/tracking/vmc.rs. Counted over 98 of the 142 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned files with no living knowledge

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling9.4 / 10Stronggated by 10 serious findings✓ 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 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: lobby.rs↔stream.rs 82%; c_api.rs↔main.rs 70%; c_api.rs↔lobby.rs 64%

Change coupling: lobby.rs ↔ stream.rs · ×8alvr/client_openxr/src/lobby.rs

Change-coupling hub: c_api.rs → main.rs, graphics.rs, lobby.rs, stream.rs · ×2alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs

What to do

Resolve the 8 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with connection.rs (2), lobby.rs, input_mapping.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Change-coupling hub finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with c_api.rs, connection.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing2.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the build pipeline provides supply-chain integrity — generated provenance/attestation, signed artifacts (cosign/sigstore), an SBOM, and pinned build actions. Presence of the configuration, not a runtime guarantee.

Method: Supply-chain provenance/signing read deterministically from CI/build config (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines, Jenkinsfile, .circleci) + the release surface: four signals — generated provenance/attestation (SLSA/in-toto/actions-attest), artifact signing (cosign/sigstore/gitsign), an SBOM (syft/sbom-action/*.spdx.json/*.cdx.json), and SHA-pinned build actions — scored 10·present/denom. NotApplicable without a build pipeline. Detects configuration presence, not runtime enforcement.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d36_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.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-Life6.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 2 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.

End-of-life runtime: Rust 1.97

What to do

Resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.

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?

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?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX9 · CQS / query purity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether read (query) handlers stay side-effect-free — a query that writes persistent state or raises events breaks CQS and makes reads unsafe to retry, cache, or route to a read replica.

Method: Roslyn scan: CQRS handlers classified query-vs-command by interface (IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler<TQuery,TResult>) and name convention (*Query/Get*/Find* vs *Command); each query handler's body checked for persistent-state writes (SaveChanges/repository Add-Update) or event publishes by resolved invocation. Deterministic, type-level, exhaustive over the detected handlers.

Coverage: Population: CQRS handlers identified by IQueryHandler/ICommandHandler/IRequestHandler interface + *Query/Get*/Find*/*Command NAME convention; query purity then checked exhaustively within that set — a query handler using neither convention is invisible, and mutation is a resolved persistence/publish CALL, not full dataflow.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ES1 · Fold determinism10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event Sourcing — Whether the recovery-replay fold is deterministic — state derived purely from each event's own fields, no clock/random/IO on the replay path.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan (event-sourcing gated): Apply/When folds checked for forbidden tokens (DateTime.Now, Guid.NewGuid, Random, IO), stripped of comments/strings. Deterministic, hard fact per fold.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ES2 · Immutable events10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event Sourcing — Whether domain events stay immutable (private fields, set once) rather than carrying mutable state.

Method: Roslyn scan (event-sourcing gated): persisted events checked for public setters; immutability verified per property/field. Deterministic, hard fact.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)7.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 16 of 22 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.5 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 significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation 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 gates10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Only 14/17 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `alvr/launcher`, `alvr/vrcompositor_wrapper`, `alvr/xtask`.

What to do

Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
Add OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry with tracing-opentelemetry) so requests are traceable across the system, not just health-probable.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Dependabot is configured but does not watch `github-actions`, `gitsubmodule` — add those `package-ecosystem` entries to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback7.0 / 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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether outbound HTTP calls are wrapped in resilience (retry/timeout/circuit-breaker) so a failing dependency doesn't cascade.

Method: Source scan: outbound HTTP clients and what bounds them — resilience handlers (Polly, AddStandardResilienceHandler) on .NET; on Go, the JVM, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, PHP, Rust, Elixir, Swift, Dart and Erlang, a timeout, deadline, retry or breaker beside each call, or a process-wide client default (a framework-wide deadline such as Drupal core's, Laravel's or actix's awc counts). Exhaustive, deterministic.

`reqwest::Client::builder(` makes an outbound HTTP call, and nothing bounds it: no timeout, deadline, retry or circuit breaker is set for it here, and the client has no process-wide default. A slow or failing dependency will hold this service's request, thread or connection until the call gives up on its own — or never, for a client with no default timeout. — alvr/launcher/src/actions.rs:30

What to do

Give every client a whole-request bound: `reqwest::Client::builder().timeout(Duration::from_secs(10))` (never `reqwest::get` or `Client::new()`, which have none), ureq's `timeout_global`, or wrap the call in `tokio::time::timeout`; add retry with back-off (`reqwest-retry`'s `RetryTransientMiddleware`, `backoff`) around dependencies that fail.

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) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux — 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?

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	78%	Adequate — gated by D2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture	98%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	61%	Adequate — gated by M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	66%	Adequate — gated by P7	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	63%	Adequate — gated by D29, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event Sourcing	100%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Performance	100%	Exemplary	Solid.

Not evidenced — 4 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.

C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control

Not included — 74 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

AC1 Text alternatives — Frontend below the scale floor (21 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC2 Forms & labels — Frontend below the scale floor (21 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC3 Page structure — Frontend below the scale floor (21 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — Frontend below the scale floor (21 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC5 ARIA correctness — Frontend below the scale floor (21 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — Frontend below the scale floor (21 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC7 A11y enforcement — Frontend below the scale floor (21 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX2 Stateful singletons — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D10 Test Quality — ~749 lines of test source are present (.rs) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .rs suite was found but not re-run
D14 License Compliance — License Compliance not included (time budget)
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. 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"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — symbol resolution incomplete — navigability not assessed
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 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.
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 — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
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 project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): 8 value object(s); 4 domain event(s); its domain events are published by services or handlers — no domain entity raises one
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and a call made through an inferred or generic receiver has no resolvable owner in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED5 Idempotency — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P10 Library API & versioning — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) 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 — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
PF2 Allocation hygiene — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X10 Duplicated predicate — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X7 Silent fallback defaults — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
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 — 81 finding(s)

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
REDACTED
+ 37 more in this group — see findings.md.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×8

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

Serious — 216 finding(s)

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×39

TodoComment alvr/audio/src/linux.rs:330 — // TODO: Would it be more correct to try to split it up over multiple datas? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/audio/src/lib.rs:454 — // todo: use smarter policy with EventTiming — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/storage.rs:46 — // todo: recover data from mismatched Config signature. low priority — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/logging_backend.rs:40 — // todo: the client debug groups settings should be moved client side when feasible — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:160 — // TODO: Don't fetch cpal sample rate, get directly from AAudio — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs:726 — // TODO: limited range fix config — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs:727 — // TODO: encoding gamma config — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs:732 — // todo: support hands — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/video_decoder/android.rs:132 — // TODO: add back when implementing proper phase sync — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_core/src/video_decoder/android.rs:245 — // todo: find out how to use it and avoid leaking the ImageReader — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs:195 — // TODO: Find a driver heuristic for the limited range bug instead? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/lobby.rs:11 — // todo: add interaction? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:195 — // todo: switch to vulkan — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:471 — // todo — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:608 — // todo: allow rendering lobby and stream layers at the same time and add cross fade — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:41 — // todo: check Quest 2 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:50 — // todo: check (base) Pico 4 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:220 — // todo: create new controller profile for quest pro and 3 — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/client_openxr/src/extra_extensions/body_tracking_bd.rs:107 — // todo: include actual Android package name — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/dashboard/src/data_sources_wasm.rs:37 — // TODO: Set X-ALVR — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs:199 — // todo: find a way to center both vertically and horizontally — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/presets/higher_order_choice.rs:137 — // todo: handle children requests — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/linux_steamvr.rs:255 — // todo: probe for AV1 when will be available in nvml-wrapper — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/gui_common/src/basic_components/button_group.rs:4 — // todo: use a custom widget — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment alvr/server_core/src/statistics.rs:265 — // todo: use target timestamp in nanoseconds. the dashboard needs to use the first — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
+ 14 more in this group — see findings.md.

D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×12

FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline runs 670 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 570 over it, 6.70× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs:196 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props runs 346 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 246 over it, 3.46× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_client_openxr::entry_point alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:160 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_client_openxr::entry_point runs 339 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 239 over it, 3.39× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:124 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline runs 322 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 222 over it, 3.22× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_core::input_mapping::automatic_bindings alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs:243 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_core::input_mapping::automatic_bindings runs 253 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 153 over it, 2.53× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_openvr::spawn_event_loop alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:233 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_openvr::spawn_event_loop runs 204 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 104 over it, 2.04× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_session::extrapolate_session_settings_from_session_settings alvr/session/src/lib.rs:155 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_session::extrapolate_session_settings_from_session_settings runs 173 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 73 over it, 1.73× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_core::tracking::tracking_loop alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs:282 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_core::tracking::tracking_loop runs 171 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 71 over it, 1.71× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_core::connection::compute_restart_settings_hash alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:97 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_core::connection::compute_restart_settings_hash runs 163 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 63 over it, 1.63× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_openvr::make_settings alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:60 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_openvr::make_settings runs 141 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 41 over it, 1.41× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_server_core::connection::handshake_loop alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:289 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_server_core::connection::handshake_loop runs 140 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 40 over it, 1.40× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: alvr_client_openxr::interaction::get_hand_data alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:784 — FunctionTooLong — alvr_client_openxr::interaction::get_hand_data runs 102 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 2 over it, 1.02× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×10

MethodTooLong: DataSources.new alvr/dashboard/src/data_sources.rs:129 — MethodTooLong — new runs 268 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 168 over it, 2.68× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: InteractionContext.new alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:201 — MethodTooLong — new runs 218 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 118 over it, 2.18× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: HandGestureManager.get_active_gestures alvr/server_core/src/hand_gestures.rs:102 — MethodTooLong — get_active_gestures runs 210 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 110 over it, 2.10× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: LobbyRenderer.render alvr/graphics/src/lobby.rs:403 — MethodTooLong — render runs 168 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 68 over it, 1.68× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: StreamRenderer.new alvr/graphics/src/stream.rs:65 — MethodTooLong — new runs 153 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 53 over it, 1.53× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: Dashboard.ui alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs:145 — MethodTooLong — ui runs 145 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 45 over it, 1.45× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: StatisticsTab.draw_bitrate_graph alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/statistics.rs:265 — MethodTooLong — draw_bitrate_graph runs 130 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 30 over it, 1.30× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: StreamContext.render alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs:339 — MethodTooLong — render runs 123 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 23 over it, 1.23× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: StreamContext.new alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs:101 — MethodTooLong — new runs 112 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 12 over it, 1.12× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: Launcher.version_popup alvr/launcher/src/ui.rs:73 — MethodTooLong — version_popup runs 111 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 11 over it, 1.11× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×8

Change coupling: lobby.rs ↔ stream.rs alvr/client_openxr/src/lobby.rs — `alvr/client_openxr/src/lobby.rs` and `alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs` change together 82% of the time (23 of the 28 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 23 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `32df9c70` Miscellaneous changes (#3270); `a211badd` refactor: :rotating_light: Fix Rust v1.89 lints (#2972); `8c0a8155` Protocol cleanup (6) (#2912) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: input_mapping.rs ↔ props.rs alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs — `alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs` and `alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs` change together 64% of the time (9 of the 14 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `669b5411` feat: Add PSVR2 Sense controller emulation (#2871); `4dd68f03` Add Quest 1 emulation options (#3024); `097dd207` feat: Pico 4 controller emulation (#2724) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: connection.rs ↔ props.rs alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs — `alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs` and `alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs` change together 64% of the time (14 of the 22 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 14 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `669b5411` feat: Add PSVR2 Sense controller emulation (#2871); `4dd68f03` Add Quest 1 emulation options (#3024); `097dd207` feat: Pico 4 controller emulation (#2724) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: builtin_schema.rs ↔ settings.rs alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/presets/builtin_schema.rs — `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/presets/builtin_schema.rs` and `alvr/session/src/settings.rs` change together 59% of the time (13 of the 22 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 13 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `ca2decae` feat(foveation): support runtime per-eye centers (#3385); `a6af8c2d` First set of UI tweaks (#3002); `971c1aeb` fix(dashboard): UIX Improvements to dashboard settings (#2840) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: stream.rs ↔ lobby.rs alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs — `alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs` and `alvr/graphics/src/lobby.rs` change together 54% of the time (13 of the 24 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 13 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `32df9c70` Miscellaneous changes (#3270); `9fee606d` feat: :sparkles: Send detached controller inputs to the server (#3049); `8c0a8155` Protocol cleanup (6) (#2912) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: main.rs ↔ lib.rs alvr/client_mock/src/main.rs — `alvr/client_mock/src/main.rs` and `alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs` change together 50% of the time (15 of the 30 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 15 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `8c4c483a` fix(android): batch startup permission requests (#3400); `750b73ce` refactor: ⬆️ Update dependencies (#3243); `3eefb9ce` feat: Refactoring around Platform (#3069) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: interaction.rs ↔ face.rs alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs — `alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs` and `alvr/server_core/src/tracking/face.rs` change together 50% of the time (6 of the 12 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `4e08e0ee` Protocol cleanup (5) (#2907); `36d7046a` refactor: Remove Pico audio visemes (#2765); `92c82f79` feat: Add support for Pico headsets face tracking (#2666) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: connection.rs ↔ hand_gestures.rs alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs — `alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs` and `alvr/server_core/src/hand_gestures.rs` change together 50% of the time (5 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 5 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `31e0d932` Support separate OpenVR hand trackers for VRChat (#2295); `2a159fd2` feat(server): :sparkles: Expose all tracked devices through events; r… (at that commit the files were still `alvr/server/src/connection.rs` and `alvr/server/src/hand_gestures.rs`); `b923da37` feat(server): :sparkles: Add `only touch` option; refactoring (at that commit the files were still `alvr/server/src/connection.rs` and `alvr/server/src/hand_gestures.rs`) — run `git show` on any of them.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · alvr_server_core · ×7

alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cyclomatic 87) alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555 — alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline has cyclomatic complexity 87 (threshold 15). Of this number, 86 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_server_core::input_mapping::automatic_bindings (cyclomatic 67) alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs:243 — alvr_server_core::input_mapping::automatic_bindings has cyclomatic complexity 67 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
alvr_server_core::connection::handshake_loop (cyclomatic 25) alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:289 — alvr_server_core::connection::handshake_loop has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_server_core::tracking::tracking_loop (cyclomatic 22) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs:282 — alvr_server_core::tracking::tracking_loop has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_server_core::input_mapping::map_button_pair_automatic (cyclomatic 21) alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs:143 — alvr_server_core::input_mapping::map_button_pair_automatic has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_server_core::tracking::body::extract_default_trackers (cyclomatic 19) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/body.rs:143 — alvr_server_core::tracking::body::extract_default_trackers has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
alvr_server_core::connection::compute_restart_settings_hash (cyclomatic 16) alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:97 — alvr_server_core::connection::compute_restart_settings_hash has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_server_core · ×7

alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cognitive 152) alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555 — alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline has cognitive complexity 152 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 71 (118 pts), match/switch 7 (14 pts), loops 10 (13 pts), boolean chains 7 (nesting depth added 57). Of this number, 151 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_server_core::input_mapping::automatic_bindings (cognitive 79) alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs:243 — alvr_server_core::input_mapping::automatic_bindings has cognitive complexity 79 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 49 (62 pts), boolean chains 17 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
alvr_server_core::connection::handshake_loop (cognitive 57) alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:289 — alvr_server_core::connection::handshake_loop has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (31 pts), match/switch 4 (11 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 31). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_server_core::tracking::tracking_loop (cognitive 43) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs:282 — alvr_server_core::tracking::tracking_loop has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (37 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 23). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_server_core::input_mapping::map_button_pair_automatic (cognitive 37) alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs:143 — alvr_server_core::input_mapping::map_button_pair_automatic has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (31 pts), boolean chains 6 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_server_core::tracking::body::extract_default_trackers (cognitive 23) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/body.rs:143 — alvr_server_core::tracking::body::extract_default_trackers has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (22 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
alvr_server_core::logging_backend::init_logging (cognitive 16) alvr/server_core/src/logging_backend.rs:13 — alvr_server_core::logging_backend::init_logging has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11, boolean chains 4, match/switch 1. Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Control · ×6

Control::ui (cognitive 37) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:46 — Control::ui has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (33 pts), loops 3 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Control::ui (cognitive 24) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/section.rs:71 — Control::ui has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (22 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Control::ui (cognitive 20) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/number.rs:52 — Control::ui has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (17 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Control::update_session_settings (cognitive 20) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/presets/higher_order_choice.rs:94 — Control::update_session_settings has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (10 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Control::ui (cognitive 20) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs:35 — Control::ui has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts), loops 3 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Control::ui (cognitive 18) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/choice.rs:101 — Control::ui has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (17 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×6

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×5

FileTooLong: src/connection.rs alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs — FileTooLong — 1074 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 574 over it, 2.15× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/interaction.rs alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs — FileTooLong — 793 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 293 over it, 1.59× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/c_api.rs alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs — FileTooLong — 642 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), declaring 45 free functions. The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 142 over it, 1.28× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/lib.rs alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs — FileTooLong — 608 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 108 over it, 1.22× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/input_mapping.rs alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs — FileTooLong — 515 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 15 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×5

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:564 — alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:564-571 | alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:694-701 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs` and `alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:574 — alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:574-581 | alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:704-711 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs` and `alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:579 — alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:579-586 | alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:1502-1509 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) alvr/launcher/src/actions.rs:152 — alvr/launcher/src/actions.rs:152-159 | alvr/launcher/src/actions.rs:166-173 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) alvr/graphics/src/staging.rs:14 — alvr/graphics/src/staging.rs:14-21 | alvr/graphics/src/staging.rs:24-31 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unmaintained) · ×4

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs:166 — alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs:166-174 | alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:114-122 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) alvr/client_openxr/src/lobby.rs:151 — alvr/client_openxr/src/lobby.rs:151-159 | alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs:379-387 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/mod.rs:57 — alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/mod.rs:57-65 | alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/mod.rs:71-79 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs:46 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs:46-54 | alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/switch.rs:50-58 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs` and `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/switch.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 30 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×4

Off the main sequence: alvr_filesystem — alvr_filesystem: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 10 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: alvr_common — alvr_common: abstractness 0.18, instability 0.00, distance 0.82 — 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.
Off the main sequence: alvr_packets — alvr_packets: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.18, distance 0.82 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 9 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: alvr_session — alvr_session: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.19, distance 0.81 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 13 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · alvr_server_openvr · ×3

alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props (cyclomatic 55) alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs:196 — alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props has cyclomatic complexity 55 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_server_openvr::spawn_event_loop (cyclomatic 39) alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:233 — alvr_server_openvr::spawn_event_loop has cyclomatic complexity 39 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_server_openvr::props::serial_number (cyclomatic 27) alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs:118 — alvr_server_openvr::props::serial_number has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · alvr_client_openxr · ×3

alvr_client_openxr::entry_point (cyclomatic 49) alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:160 — alvr_client_openxr::entry_point has cyclomatic complexity 49 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_client_openxr::stream::stream_input_loop (cyclomatic 18) alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs:529 — alvr_client_openxr::stream::stream_input_loop has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_client_openxr::interaction::get_hand_data (cyclomatic 16) alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:784 — alvr_client_openxr::interaction::get_hand_data has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×3

Hotspot: alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:555 — alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 87 in alvr_server_core::connection::connection_pipeline at line 555. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:18:47 +00:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:18:47 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:233 — alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 39 in alvr_server_openvr::spawn_event_loop at line 233. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 3 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:18:47 +00:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:18:47 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs:145 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 38 in Dashboard::ui at line 145. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-29..2026-09-27, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-29 17:18:47 +00:00' --until='2026-09-27 17:18:47 +00:00' --full-history --no-merges -- alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D17 · Explicit Debt · FixmeComment · ×3

FixmeComment alvr/audio/src/linux.rs:76 — // fixme: Opening pavucontrol while audio is actively streaming — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/linux_steamvr.rs:240 — // fixme: on multi-gpu nvidia system will do it twice, — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
FixmeComment alvr/server_io/src/lib.rs:66 — // fixme: the dashboard is doing this wrong because it is holding its own session state. If read and — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_client_openxr · ×3

alvr_client_openxr::entry_point (cognitive 101) alvr/client_openxr/src/lib.rs:160 — alvr_client_openxr::entry_point has cognitive complexity 101 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 25 (70 pts), match/switch 6 (20 pts), loops 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 64). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_client_openxr::interaction::get_hand_data (cognitive 25) alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:784 — alvr_client_openxr::interaction::get_hand_data has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (20 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_client_openxr::stream::stream_input_loop (cognitive 24) alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs:529 — alvr_client_openxr::stream::stream_input_loop has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_server_openvr · ×3

alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props (cognitive 87) alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs:196 — alvr_server_openvr::props::set_device_openvr_props has cognitive complexity 87 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 32 (73 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 47). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
alvr_server_openvr::spawn_event_loop (cognitive 84) alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:233 — alvr_server_openvr::spawn_event_loop has cognitive complexity 84 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 24 (62 pts), loops 3 (9 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 49). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_server_openvr::props::serial_number (cognitive 26) alvr/server_openvr/src/props.rs:118 — alvr_server_openvr::props::serial_number has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (20 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unsound) · ×3

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×3

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · alvr_client_core · ×2

alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cyclomatic 53) alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:124 — alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline has cyclomatic complexity 53 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
alvr_client_core::video_decoder::android::decoder_lifecycle (cyclomatic 18) alvr/client_core/src/video_decoder/android.rs:193 — alvr_client_core::video_decoder::android::decoder_lifecycle has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · InteractionContext · ×2

InteractionContext::select_sources (cyclomatic 23) alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:503 — InteractionContext::select_sources has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
InteractionContext::new (cyclomatic 17) alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:201 — InteractionContext::new has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_client_core · ×2

alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline (cognitive 79) alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs:124 — alvr_client_core::connection::connection_pipeline has cognitive complexity 79 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 27 (50 pts), loops 9 (13 pts), match/switch 6 (12 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 33). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_client_core::video_decoder::android::decoder_lifecycle (cognitive 22) alvr/client_core/src/video_decoder/android.rs:193 — alvr_client_core::video_decoder::android::decoder_lifecycle has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), match/switch 4 (7 pts), loops 2 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_audio · ×2

alvr_audio::receive_samples_loop (cognitive 52) alvr/audio/src/lib.rs:377 — alvr_audio::receive_samples_loop has cognitive complexity 52 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 7 (28 pts), if/else 9 (20 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 33). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
alvr_audio::record_audio_blocking (cognitive 17) alvr/audio/src/lib.rs:249 — alvr_audio::record_audio_blocking has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (11 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Launcher · ×2

Launcher::ui (cognitive 37) alvr/launcher/src/ui.rs:282 — Launcher::ui has cognitive complexity 37 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (22 pts), match/switch 5 (11 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Launcher::launch_steamvr (cognitive 21) alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/mod.rs:130 — Launcher::launch_steamvr has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (20 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_dashboard · ×2

alvr_dashboard::steamvr_launcher::linux_steamvr::linux_encoder_checks (cognitive 23) alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/linux_steamvr.rs:232 — alvr_dashboard::steamvr_launcher::linux_steamvr::linux_encoder_checks has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 3 (10 pts), if/else 3 (8 pts), loops 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
alvr_dashboard::steamvr_launcher::linux_steamvr::linux_gpu_checks (cognitive 20) alvr/dashboard/src/steamvr_launcher/linux_steamvr.rs:113 — alvr_dashboard::steamvr_launcher::linux_steamvr::linux_gpu_checks has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (14 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change-coupling hub · ×2

Change-coupling hub: c_api.rs → main.rs, graphics.rs, lobby.rs, stream.rs alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs — `alvr/client_core/src/c_api.rs` changes together with 4 other files — `alvr/client_mock/src/main.rs`, `alvr/client_openxr/src/graphics.rs`, `alvr/client_openxr/src/lobby.rs`, `alvr/client_openxr/src/stream.rs` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 4 separate couplings, not 4 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 4.
Change-coupling hub: connection.rs → mod.rs, main.rs, udp.rs alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs — `alvr/client_core/src/connection.rs` changes together with 3 other files — `alvr/client_core/src/video_decoder/mod.rs`, `alvr/client_mock/src/main.rs`, `alvr/sockets/src/stream_socket/udp.rs` — none of which declares a dependency on it: one file is the hub of 3 separate couplings, not 3 unrelated pairs. Read the hub first: if the others each duplicate a part of what it does, the shared concern belongs in ONE unit and extracting it clears every edge at once; if the hub is a registry, dispatcher or barrel that must name each of them, the coupling is structural and the question is whether that list can be discovered instead of enumerated. Fixing the hub is one change; breaking the couplings one pair at a time is 3.

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

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:98 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:98-113 | alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs:80-95 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs` and `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 52 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs:23 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs:23-38 | alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/switch.rs:27-42 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs` and `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/switch.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 30 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs:40 — alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs:40-52 | alvr/sockets/src/stream_socket/tcp.rs:43-55 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs` and `alvr/sockets/src/stream_socket/tcp.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 42 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/body.rs:66 — alvr/server_core/src/tracking/body.rs:66-78 | alvr/server_core/src/tracking/vmc.rs:94-106 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

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

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:496 — alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:496-505 | alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:588-597 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs` and `alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs:23 — alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs:23-32 | alvr/sockets/src/stream_socket/tcp.rs:26-35 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs` and `alvr/sockets/src/stream_socket/tcp.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 42 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:473 — alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs:473-484 | alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:567-578 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/server_core/src/c_api.rs` and `alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:174 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:174-185 | alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs:120-131 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs` and `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 52 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · DataSources · ×1

DataSources::new (cyclomatic 59) alvr/dashboard/src/data_sources.rs:129 — DataSources::new has cyclomatic complexity 59 (threshold 15). Of this number, 58 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Dashboard · ×1

Dashboard::ui (cyclomatic 38) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs:145 — Dashboard::ui has cyclomatic complexity 38 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · alvr_xtask · ×1

alvr_xtask::main (cyclomatic 37) alvr/xtask/src/main.rs:164 — alvr_xtask::main has cyclomatic complexity 37 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · EyeTrackedFoveation · ×1

EyeTrackedFoveation::update (cyclomatic 23) alvr/server_openvr/src/foveated_encoding.rs:45 — EyeTrackedFoveation::update has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Launcher · ×1

Launcher::ui (cyclomatic 22) alvr/launcher/src/ui.rs:282 — Launcher::ui has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · alvr_audio · ×1

alvr_audio::receive_samples_loop (cyclomatic 19) alvr/audio/src/lib.rs:377 — alvr_audio::receive_samples_loop has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · LobbyRenderer · ×1

LobbyRenderer::render (cyclomatic 18) alvr/graphics/src/lobby.rs:403 — LobbyRenderer::render has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). Of this number, 16 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ServerSessionManager · ×1

ServerSessionManager::update_client_connections (cyclomatic 18) alvr/server_io/src/lib.rs:194 — ServerSessionManager::update_client_connections has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · alvr_session · ×1

alvr_session::extrapolate_session_settings_from_session_settings (cyclomatic 18) alvr/session/src/lib.rs:155 — alvr_session::extrapolate_session_settings_from_session_settings has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · SetupWizard · ×1

SetupWizard::ui (cyclomatic 17) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/setup_wizard.rs:68 — SetupWizard::ui has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · DevicesTab · ×1

DevicesTab::ui (cyclomatic 16) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/devices.rs:52 — DevicesTab::ui has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ButtonMappingManager · ×1

ButtonMappingManager::map_button (cyclomatic 16) alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs:645 — ButtonMappingManager::map_button has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · FaceTrackingSink · ×1

FaceTrackingSink::send_tracking (cyclomatic 16) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/face.rs:54 — FaceTrackingSink::send_tracking has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D17 · Explicit Debt · HackComment · ×1

HackComment alvr/client_openxr/src/extra_extensions/passthrough_fb.rs:61 — // HACK: YVR runtime seems to ignore IS_RUNNING_AT_CREATION on versions <= 3.0.1 — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DataSources · ×1

DataSources::new (cognitive 94) alvr/dashboard/src/data_sources.rs:129 — DataSources::new has cognitive complexity 94 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (71 pts), match/switch 3 (11 pts), loops 6 (9 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 56). Of this number, 89 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Dashboard · ×1

Dashboard::ui (cognitive 55) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/mod.rs:145 — Dashboard::ui has cognitive complexity 55 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (35 pts), match/switch 4 (11 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 28). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LobbyRenderer · ×1

LobbyRenderer::render (cognitive 45) alvr/graphics/src/lobby.rs:403 — LobbyRenderer::render has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (26 pts), loops 7 (16 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 27). Of this number, 41 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_xtask · ×1

alvr_xtask::main (cognitive 42) alvr/xtask/src/main.rs:164 — alvr_xtask::main has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (37 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 22). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · EyeTrackedFoveation · ×1

EyeTrackedFoveation::update (cognitive 41) alvr/server_openvr/src/foveated_encoding.rs:45 — EyeTrackedFoveation::update has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (27 pts), loops 5 (11 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · InteractionContext · ×1

InteractionContext::select_sources (cognitive 38) alvr/client_openxr/src/interaction.rs:503 — InteractionContext::select_sources has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 17 (31 pts), boolean chains 4, match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ButtonMappingManager · ×1

ButtonMappingManager::map_button (cognitive 30) alvr/server_core/src/input_mapping.rs:645 — ButtonMappingManager::map_button has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (20 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DevicesTab · ×1

DevicesTab::ui (cognitive 24) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/devices.rs:52 — DevicesTab::ui has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (19 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HandGestureManager · ×1

HandGestureManager::is_gesture_active (cognitive 24) alvr/server_core/src/hand_gestures.rs:366 — HandGestureManager::is_gesture_active has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (22 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ServerCoreContext · ×1

ServerCoreContext::send_video_nal (cognitive 24) alvr/server_core/src/lib.rs:396 — ServerCoreContext::send_video_nal has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (22 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WiredConnection · ×1

WiredConnection::setup (cognitive 21) alvr/adb/src/lib.rs:32 — WiredConnection::setup has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (16 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BitrateManager · ×1

BitrateManager::get_encoder_params (cognitive 20) alvr/server_core/src/bitrate.rs:150 — BitrateManager::get_encoder_params has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FaceTrackingSink · ×1

FaceTrackingSink::send_tracking (cognitive 20) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/face.rs:54 — FaceTrackingSink::send_tracking has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 9). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ServerSessionManager · ×1

ServerSessionManager::update_client_connections (cognitive 20) alvr/server_io/src/lib.rs:194 — ServerSessionManager::update_client_connections has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WelcomeSocket · ×1

WelcomeSocket::recv_all (cognitive 19) alvr/server_core/src/sockets.rs:22 — WelcomeSocket::recv_all has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (15 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · alvr_session · ×1

alvr_session::extrapolate_session_settings_from_session_settings (cognitive 19) alvr/session/src/lib.rs:155 — alvr_session::extrapolate_session_settings_from_session_settings has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · SetupWizard · ×1

SetupWizard::ui (cognitive 17) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/setup_wizard.rs:68 — SetupWizard::ui has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (16 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TrackingManager · ×1

TrackingManager::report_device_motions (cognitive 16) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs:116 — TrackingManager::report_device_motions has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming convention for C API conversions. Most pairs use 'to_capi_' and 'from_capi_' prefixes, but the module itself is named 'c_api'. While this is internally consistent within the module, it differs from common Rust FFI patterns (e.g., 'into_*'/'from_*' or 'to_*'/'from_*') and creates a slight cognitive load compared to standard library conventions. More critically, the existence of both `AlvrFov` (C API) and `Fov` (Primitives) with identical structures suggests a lack of a unified type system for cross-boundary data, forcing manual conversion functions for every primitive type. · ×1

Inconsistent naming convention for C API conversions. Most pairs use 'to_capi_' and 'from_capi_' prefixes, but the module itself is named 'c_api'. While this is internally consistent within the module, it differs from common Rust FFI patterns (e.g., 'into_*'/'from_*' or 'to_*'/'from_*') and creates a slight cognitive load compared to standard library conventions. More critically, the existence of both `AlvrFov` (C API) and `Fov` (Primitives) with identical structures suggests a lack of a unified type system for cross-boundary data, forcing manual conversion functions for every primitive type. — Consider using a macro or code generation to ensure strict symmetry in naming (e.g., `into_capi`/`from_capi` or `to_c`/`from_c`). Alternatively, if the C API types are just wrappers, consider implementing `From`/`Into` traits to allow idiomatic Rust conversions rather than explicit function calls, reducing API surface clutter. (signatures: alvr_common.c_api.to_capi_fov(fov: Fov): AlvrFov | alvr_common.c_api.from_capi_fov(fov: AlvrFov): Fov | alvr_common.c_api.to_capi_quat(quat: Quat): AlvrQuat | alvr_common.c_api.from_capi_quat(quat: AlvrQuat): Quat | alvr_common.c_api.to_capi_pose(pose: Pose): AlvrPose | alvr_common.c_api.from_capi_pose(pose: AlvrPose): Pose | alvr_common.c_api.to_capi_view_params(view_params: ViewParams): AlvrViewParams | alvr_common.c_api.from_capi_view_params(view_params: AlvrViewParams): ViewParams)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Redundant and confusingly named logging/error reporting functions. `show_warn` and `show_err` both take a `Result` and return `T`, implying they unwrap and log. `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` take an error type `E`. The distinction between `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` is unclear without documentation (is it debug-only? does it include backtrace?). Similarly, the distinction between `show_err` and `show_e` is ambiguous · ×1

Redundant and confusingly named logging/error reporting functions. `show_warn` and `show_err` both take a `Result` and return `T`, implying they unwrap and log. `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` take an error type `E`. The distinction between `show_e` and `show_e_dbg` is unclear without documentation (is it debug-only? does it include backtrace?). Similarly, the distinction between `show_err` and `show_e` is ambiguous: does one handle `Result` and the other raw errors? If so, why not name them `log_result` and `log_error`? The presence of `_blocking` variants suggests async context, but the non-blocking variants don't specify their execution context clearly. — Unify error logging into a consistent set: `log_error(Result)`, `log_warning(Result)`, `log_error_raw(Error)`. Remove `show_e_dbg` unless it serves a distinct, well-documented purpose (e.g., verbose backtrace). Rename `show_*` to `log_*` for clarity. (signatures: alvr_common.logging.show_warn(res: Result): T | alvr_common.logging.show_e(e: E) | alvr_common.logging.show_e_dbg(e: E) | alvr_common.logging.show_e_blocking(e: E) | alvr_common.logging.show_err(res: Result): T | alvr_common.logging.show_err_blocking(res: Result): T)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate intent between `VideoStreamingCapabilities` and `ClientCapabilities`. Both types contain nearly identical properties · ×1

Duplicate intent between `VideoStreamingCapabilities` and `ClientCapabilities`. Both types contain nearly identical properties: `default_view_resolution`, `max_view_resolution`, `refresh_rates`, `foveated_encoding`, `encoder_high_profile`, `encoder_10_bits`, `encoder_av1`, `prefer_10bit`, `preferred_encoding_gamma`, `prefer_hdr`. `VideoStreamingCapabilities` is used in network packets, while `ClientCapabilities` is used in the core client context. This duplication increases maintenance burden and risk of desync. — Create a single `StreamingCapabilities` struct that is used internally by `ClientCapabilities` and serialized/deserialized for `VideoStreamingCapabilities` in the packet layer. Use `#[serde]` or similar attributes to handle the network representation if needed, or keep a thin wrapper if the C API requires it, but avoid maintaining two separate structs with identical fields. (signatures: alvr_packets.VideoStreamingCapabilities | alvr_client_core.ClientCapabilities)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Three different types represent the same negotiated streaming configuration. `ClientNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in packets, `ServerNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in server core, and `AlvrNegotiatedConfig` is in the server C API. They share fields like `view_resolution`, `refresh_rate`, `foveated_encoding`, `codec`, etc. This tripartite duplication is a significant consistency issue. · ×1

Three different types represent the same negotiated streaming configuration. `ClientNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in packets, `ServerNegotiatedStreamingConfig` is in server core, and `AlvrNegotiatedConfig` is in the server C API. They share fields like `view_resolution`, `refresh_rate`, `foveated_encoding`, `codec`, etc. This tripartite duplication is a significant consistency issue. — Define a single `NegotiatedStreamingConfig` type in a shared module (e.g., `alvr_common` or `alvr_packets`). Derive or implement conversions to/from the C API type (`AlvrNegotiatedConfig`) and use the same type in the server core, possibly with a thin wrapper if server-specific logic is needed, but avoid duplicating the data structure. (signatures: alvr_packets.ClientNegotiatedStreamingConfig | alvr_server_core.ServerNegotiatedStreamingConfig | alvr_server_core.c_api.AlvrNegotiatedConfig)

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

REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (49 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member pair (49 shared lines) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:51 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:51-196 | alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs:40-139 — These two members are variants of one another: 49 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21–24 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (21–24 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:62 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs:62-85 | alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs:50-70 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/dictionary.rs` and `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/vector.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 52 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs:63 — alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs:63-81 | alvr/sockets/src/stream_socket/tcp.rs:66-84 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs` and `alvr/sockets/src/stream_socket/tcp.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 42 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:127 — alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:127-143 | alvr/server_openvr/src/lib.rs:90-106 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–13 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/main.rs:77 — alvr/dashboard/src/main.rs:77-87 | alvr/launcher/src/main.rs:56-68 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs:488 — alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs:488-498 | alvr/server_core/src/tracking/mod.rs:516-526 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7–9 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7–9 lines × 2) alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:90 — alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:90-96 | alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:286-294 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) alvr/server_core/src/lib.rs:381 — alvr/server_core/src/lib.rs:381-387 | alvr/server_core/src/lib.rs:448-454 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:228 — alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:228-232 | alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:234-238 | alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:240-244 | alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs:246-250 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (4–5 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (4–5 lines × 3) alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:247 — alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:247-250 | alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:251-255 | alvr/server_core/src/connection.rs:258-262 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs:56 — alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs:56-60 | alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/switch.rs:60-64 — before extracting anything, compare `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/optional.rs` and `alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/switch.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 30 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D44 · Platform End-of-Life · End-of-life runtime · ×1

End-of-life runtime: Rust 1.97 — rust-toolchain.toml declares Rust 1.97 as this project's toolchain file, and Rust 1.97, superseded by 1.98 on 2026-08-20 (the Rust project patches only the current stable). An unsupported runtime receives no security patches, so every vulnerability disclosed in it since 2026-08-20 is present and unfixable without moving off it. This is a migration rather than an upgrade: there is no newer release of a runtime that has ended.

D5 · Coupling · Unstable project alvr_server_core · ×1

Unstable project alvr_server_core — alvr_server_core has instability 0.90 with 1 dependents.

P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience · Outbound HTTP without resilience · ×1

Outbound HTTP without resilience alvr/launcher/src/actions.rs:30 — `reqwest::Client::builder(` makes an outbound HTTP call, and nothing bounds it: no timeout, deadline, retry or circuit breaker is set for it here, and the client has no process-wide default. A slow or failing dependency will hold this service's request, thread or connection until the call gives up on its own — or never, for a client with no default timeout.

Minor — 9 finding(s)

D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 10 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: alvr/dashboard/src/data_sources.rs, alvr/client_core/src/video_decoder/android.rs, alvr/graphics/src/lib.rs, alvr/server_openvr/src/tracking.rs, alvr/sockets/src/lib.rs, alvr/sockets/src/control_socket.rs, alvr/dashboard/src/dashboard/components/settings_controls/section.rs, alvr/server_core/src/logging_backend.rs (+2 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

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

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×1

REDACTED

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1

Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 3 of 98 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 98 of the 142 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: alvr/server_core/src/tracking/vmc.rs, alvr/client_openxr/src/extra_extensions/motion_tracking_bd.rs, alvr/xtask/src/ci.rs. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

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.

P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1

Logging is not universal — Only 14/17 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `alvr/launcher`, `alvr/vrcompositor_wrapper`, `alvr/xtask`.

Minor — 24 finding(s)

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×24

Outdated: anyhow — `anyhow` is locked at 1.0.103 but 1.0.104 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1"` requirement declared in alvr/adb/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p anyhow` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: bytemuck — `bytemuck` is locked at 1.25.0 but 1.25.2 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1"` requirement declared in alvr/session/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p bytemuck` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: cc — `cc` is locked at 1.2.65 but 1.5.1 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1"` requirement declared in alvr/server_openvr/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p cc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: chrono — `chrono` is locked at 0.4.44 but 0.4.45 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.4"` requirement declared in alvr/dashboard/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p chrono` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: encoding_rs_io — `encoding_rs_io` is locked at 0.1.7 but 0.1.8 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.1"` requirement declared in alvr/server_io/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p encoding_rs_io` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: env_logger — `env_logger` is locked at 0.11.10 but 0.11.11 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.11"` requirement declared in alvr/client_core/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p env_logger` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: flate2 — `flate2` is locked at 1.1.9 but 1.1.10 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1.0.18"` requirement declared in alvr/launcher/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p flate2` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: futures-util — `futures-util` is locked at 0.3.32 but 0.3.34 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.3.28"` requirement declared in alvr/launcher/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p futures-util` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: libc — `libc` is locked at 0.2.186 but 0.2.189 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.2"` requirement declared in alvr/client_openxr/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p libc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: local-ip-address — `local-ip-address` is locked at 0.6.11 but 0.6.13 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.6"` requirement declared in alvr/system_info/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p local-ip-address` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: log — `log` is locked at 0.4.33 but 0.4.34 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.4"` requirement declared in alvr/common/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p log` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: open — `open` is locked at 5.3.3 but 5.4.4 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"5"` requirement declared in alvr/launcher/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p open` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: pastey — `pastey` is locked at 0.2.1 but 0.2.3 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.2"` requirement declared in alvr/common/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p pastey` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: pkg-config — `pkg-config` is locked at 0.3.33 but 0.3.34 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.3"` requirement declared in alvr/server_openvr/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p pkg-config` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: rand — `rand` is locked at 0.10.1 but 0.10.3 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.10"` requirement declared in alvr/client_core/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p rand` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: regex — `regex` is locked at 1.12.3 but 1.13.1 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1"` requirement declared in alvr/packets/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p regex` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: reqwest — `reqwest` is locked at 0.13.2 but 0.13.5 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.13"` requirement declared in alvr/launcher/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p reqwest` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: serde — `serde` is locked at 1.0.228 but 1.0.229 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1"` requirement declared in alvr/audio/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p serde` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: serde_json — `serde_json` is locked at 1.0.150 but 1.0.151 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1"` requirement declared in alvr/client_core/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p serde_json` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: socket2 — `socket2` is locked at 0.6.3 but 0.6.5 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.6"` requirement declared in alvr/sockets/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p socket2` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: tar — `tar` is locked at 0.4.45 but 0.4.46 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"0.4"` requirement declared in alvr/launcher/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p tar` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: tokio — `tokio` is locked at 1.52.0 but 1.53.1 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"1"` requirement declared in alvr/launcher/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p tokio` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ureq — `ureq` is locked at 3.3.0 but 3.4.2 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"3"` requirement declared in alvr/adb/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p ureq` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: zip — `zip` is locked at 8.5.1 but 8.6.0 is the current stable release on crates.io, and it already satisfies the `"8"` requirement declared in alvr/adb/Cargo.toml — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `cargo update -p zip` and commit the updated REDACTED.

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-d7c2c08909f24f6f9b175c2eb7941ae9/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-d7c2c08909f24f6f9b175c2eb7941ae9/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 .	72	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive .	15	artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	12	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.	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	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive .	0	artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json

Run 01a0ecb3-cf5b-7612-997c-d7631b15f2da · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Alvr-Org/ALVR

Findings by grade

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture — module dependency matrix

At a glance — Code Health · 78% · Adequate · gated by D2 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 98% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 61% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Adequate · gated by P7 ·

At a glance — Security · 63% · Adequate · gated by D29, D36 ·

At a glance — Event Sourcing · 100% · Exemplary ·

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

Reference — by lens

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Downloadable artifacts