ockam — Watchdog Audit

Executive summary

⚠ A critical security finding caps this grade — resolve it before relying on the score below; see the Security lens.

Preview (pre-1.0). This repo hasn't declared a stable release, so it's judged against a relaxed, pre-production bar.

The system holds a 58% health score, indicating a workable asset carrying significant risk. While the code is well-structured and the architecture is robust, the overall standing is fragile due to critical gaps in security and operational maturity. This score reflects a large, valuable codebase that requires immediate attention to prevent costly delays and exposure.

The asset is substantial, comprising over 150,000 lines of production code. Rebuilding this logic from scratch would require approximately 1.3 person-years and cost around €180,000, highlighting the high value tied up in the current implementation. The code itself is clean and highly maintainable, with strong architectural patterns and excellent domain modeling. However, the low maturity and security scores suggest that while the code is good, the processes and protections surrounding it are insufficient for safe, long-term operation.

The most pressing issue is security exposure. With a security score of 42%, the system is vulnerable to threats that could lead to data breaches or compliance failures. This is the highest-impact risk because it affects the entire large asset. Remediation here buys the most protection against operational disruption and reputational damage. The second theme is knowledge fragility. The maturity score of 53% indicates that new teams would struggle to pick up the work. Without clear documentation of design decisions, changes become risky and slow, increasing the likelihood of defects and extending delivery timelines.

What is genuinely good is the code quality and architectural integrity. The high scores in code health, architecture, and domain modeling mean the foundation is solid. The effort to fix issues is not about rewriting the system but about hardening it. The best return on effort is to record significant decisions in a centralized, discoverable format. This single action will immediately improve maturity and reduce future risk. Expanding the README with a project map and getting-started guide should follow closely. This focus leverages the existing strong codebase while addressing the critical gaps in security and knowledge management.

Code Health 86% Strong Architecture 94% ★ Exemplary Maturity 53% Adequate · gated by D34, M2 Readiness 85% ★ Exemplary Security 42% Weak · gated by D29, D30, D36 Domain Modelling 91% ★ Exemplary 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.

Security 42% · 45% weightMaturity 53% · 25% weightReadiness 85% · 14% weightCode Health 86% · 8% weightDomain Modelling 91% · 4% weightArchitecture 94% · 2% weightEvent Sourcing 100% · 1% weightPerformance 100% · 1% weight

Raise Security 42 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 58 → ~67.

Code composition — where the lines go

Tests 100%

New since the last scan (55+)

55 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-14) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

D4 · Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 8 shared lines) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/multiaddr_resolver/local_resolver.rs
D4 · Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/entrypoint.rs
D4 · Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/credential_issuer/credential_issuer_worker.rs
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/listener/list.rs
D4 · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/router/mod.rs
D4 · Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/request/parser.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/parser.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (3–10 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/api/request.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/relay/static_forwarding_api.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/mini_cbor.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/protocol/stream.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/stream/client/consumer.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/relay/static_forwarding_api.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/session/pluggable/initiator.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/transport/tcp/address.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/kafka_interceptor.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (25 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/reliable_deduplication.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/ordering.ex
D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/session/count_to.ex
D5 · Unstable project ockam (Cargo)
D5 · Unstable project ockam_api
D5 · Off the main sequence: ockam_core
D6 · Low cohesion: RelayServiceOptions (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/relay_service/options.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: DeployCommand (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: HandshakeState (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: TcpOutletOptions (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/options.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: NodeInfo (LCOM4 6) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/nodes.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: SecureChannelOptions (LCOM4 6) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/options.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: Context (LCOM4 6) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/context/context.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: Terminal (LCOM4 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/ui/terminal/mod.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: SecureChannelListenerOptions (LCOM4 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/options.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: ExportedIdentity (LCOM4 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/identity/export.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: TcpConnectionOptions (LCOM4 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/options.rs
D22 · Duplicate functionality for creating relays. `Node` has `create_relay` and `create_static_relay`, while the `RemoteRelay` type also exposes `create` and `create_static` with nearly identical signatures (except `RemoteRelay` takes `Context` explicitly). This creates confusion about whether to use the Node method or the RemoteRelay static method.
D22 · Inconsistent naming and parameter handling for message sending. `send` takes a generic `route: R` while others take `impl Into<Route>`. `send` and `send_extended` do not return a response, while `send_and_receive` and `send_and_receive_extended` do. The naming convention switches between `send` and `send_and_receive` without a clear parallel structure for the 'extended' variants (e.g., is there a `send_extended` that returns? No, but `send_and_receive_extended` exists).
D22 · Confusingly similar methods for retrieving identity information. `get_named_identity` vs `get_named_identity_or_default` vs `get_identity_by_optional_name` vs `get_identifier_by_optional_name`. It is unclear when to use 'optional' vs 'default' vs direct lookup, and whether the return type is the full Identity, just the Identifier, or a NamedIdentity struct.
D22 · Inconsistent method naming for identity creation. `create_identity_with_name_and_vault` vs `create_identity_with_name` vs `create_identity_with_key_id`. The parameters are not consistently ordered or named, and the distinction between 'with_name' and 'with_name_and_vault' is unclear (does 'with_name' use a default vault?).
D22 · Inconsistent naming pattern for space retrieval compared to identity retrieval. `get_space_by_name` vs `get_space_by_name_or_default` vs `get_default_space`. While similar to the identity issue, the presence of `get_default_space` as a separate method without a name argument is inconsistent with `get_named_identity_or_default` which takes a name.
D30 · REDACTED
D35 · Change coupling: REDACTED ↔ space.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/enroll.rs
D35 · Change coupling: addon.rs ↔ REDACTED implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/addon.rs
D44 · End-of-life runtime: Rust 1.86

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 — €61,000–€310,000

Cost to rebuild	€61,000–€310,000 (0.6–1.9 person-years (1,017–3,228 h), ~1–3 engineers)
Domain complexity	Standard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor	0.8× (at 58% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape	Large · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~1.3 person-years of build effort (about ~€180,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Security at 42% — 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 0.8× 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.

+8.2 pts · Low effort · ADR Quality

Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with interceptor.rs, lib.rs, session.rs.

+5.0 pts · Low effort · Knowledge Freshness

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).

+8.8 pts · Medium effort · Architecture documentation

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

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

This is a Large asset (~1.3 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Security at 42%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.

Evidence: valuation: Large, ~1.3 person-years rebuild (156,143 LoC) · weakest lens: Security 42%

→ Direct remediation budget at Security 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).

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.)

965 modules, 3120 dependencies. 11 dependency cycles across 98 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 925 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 →	2 ockam_abac.types	3 ockam_api.control_api.protocol.common	4 ockam_api.ui.command	5 ockam_api.ui.output	6 ockam_command.error	7 ockam_core.flow_control.flow_control_id	8 ockam_multiaddr	9 ockam_transport_core.hostname_port	10 ockam_abac.policy_expr	11 ockam_abac.resource	12 ockam_api.orchestrator.email_address	13 ockam_api.ui.terminal	14 ockam_core.routing.route	15 ockam_identity.models.timestamp	16 ockam_macros.internals.ctx	17 ockam_node.storage.database.sqlx_database	18 ockam_abac.expr	20 ockam_core.routing.message.local_message	21 ockam_core.message	22 ockam_core.api	23 ockam_core.routing.address	25 ockam_identity.models.identifiers	27 ockam_api.orchestrator.secure_clients	30 ockam_identity.models.change_history	31 ockam_api.cli_state.cli_state	35 ockam_api.nodes.service.manager	36 ockam_command.command_global_opts	37 ockam_api.nodes.service.in_memory_node	39 ockam_command.node_command
1 Ockam
2 ockam_abac.types
3 ockam_api.control_api.protocol.common
4 ockam_api.ui.command
5 ockam_api.ui.output
6 ockam_command.error
7 ockam_core.flow_control.flow_control_id
8 ockam_multiaddr
9 ockam_transport_core.hostname_port
10 ockam_abac.policy_expr																	1
11 ockam_abac.resource	1
12 ockam_api.orchestrator.email_address					1
13 ockam_api.ui.terminal				1
14 ockam_core.routing.route				1															1
15 ockam_identity.models.timestamp				1
16 ockam_macros.internals.ctx					1
17 ockam_node.storage.database.sqlx_database					1
18 ockam_abac.expr									1
19 ockam_command.terminal.tui												2
20 ockam_core.routing.message.local_message													1						2		1
21 ockam_core.message													1					1			1
22 ockam_core.api				1	2														8
23 ockam_core.routing.address				1									1						1
24 ockam_core.worker															1				1
25 ockam_identity.models.identifiers																			2
26 ockam.remote.addresses																					1
27 ockam_api.orchestrator.secure_clients											1				3							2
28 ockam_core.flow_control.flow_controls.flow_controls						1															1
29 ockam_core.routing.message.relay_message													1					1			1
30 ockam_identity.models.change_history														1								1
31 ockam_api.cli_state.cli_state		1			1		1	1			1					1					1	1		1
32 ockam_command.shared_args							1																	1
33 ockam_node.storage.database.auto_retry	2									2	1			1			1				1	1		1
34 ockam_api.nodes.service.background_node_client	1						1	1	1				1		1					1	1	1			1
35 ockam_api.nodes.service.manager	1	1				4	1	1	1	1			1		1		1				1	1	1		2
36 ockam_command.command_global_opts												1													1
37 ockam_api.nodes.service.in_memory_node		1					2	1	1		1		1		2						1	1	1	2	2	3
38 ockam_command.node															1												1
39 ockam_command.node_command															1										1			1
40 ockam_command.cluster.show			1												1												2	1	1

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

At a glance — Code Health · 86% · Strong ·

The Good

D1 · Rust Cyclomatic Complexity 7.5 D3 · Rust God Classes 9.2 D4 · Rust Code Duplication 9.4 D17 · Rust Explicit Debt 9.5

The Bad

D2 · Rust Cognitive Complexity 5.7

At a glance — Architecture · 94% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Rust Coupling 9.0 D6 · Rust Cohesion (LCOM4) 9.8 D35 · Rust Change Coupling 9.9 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.4 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

The Bad

D22 · Rust Internal API Consistency 6.0 D26 · Rust Project Cohesion 5.4

At a glance — Maturity · 53% · Adequate · gated by D34, M2 ·

The Good

D15 · Rust Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D16 · Rust Bus Factor 9.8 D19 · Rust Documentation Quality 9.0 D21 · Rust Naming Consistency 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 6.2 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Ugly

D20 · Rust ADR Quality 0.0 D34 · Rust Knowledge Freshness 2.0 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 85% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D9 · Rust Test Distribution 10.0 D12 · Rust Dependency Hygiene 7.3 D13 · Rust REDACTED Scanning 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 8.9 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 7.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 10.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0

At a glance — Security · 42% · Weak · gated by D29, D30, D36 ·

The Good

D43 · Rust Malicious Dependencies 10.0

The Bad

D31 · Rust IaC & Container Security 6.7 D44 · Rust Platform End-of-Life 6.0

The Ugly

D28 · Rust Secrets (history) 4.0 D29 · Rust Static Analysis (SAST) 0.1 D30 · Rust Dependency Vulnerabilities 0.0 D36 · Rust Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 2.5

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 91% · Exemplary ·

The Good

DM4 · Repo Rich vs anemic domain model 7.9 DM5 · Repo Encapsulated state 10.0 DM6 · Repo Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary 10.0

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
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components	49	High / Critical
A03:2021 — Injection	35	High / Critical
A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration	24	High / Critical
A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures	7	High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by establishing a centralized repository for architectural decisions, ensuring each is documented with its context and consequences, while simultaneously expanding the README to provide a clear getting-started guide and project map. Next, address the quality of existing architectural records and remove significant orphaned files, prioritizing interceptor.rs, lib.rs, and session.rs to maintain knowledge freshness. Finally, remediate historical secrets by cleaning up credential exposure in the specified exchange files to secure the codebase.

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.	+8.2 pts	Low	ADR Quality
Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with interceptor.rs, lib.rs, session.rs.	+5.0 pts	Low	Knowledge Freshness
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).	+8.8 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
Expand the README with getting-started, architecture overview and a project map.	+8.5 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)
Resolve the 6 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2), REDACTED.	+3.3 pts	Low	Secrets (history)
Resolve the 1 End-of-life runtime finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life.	+2.6 pts	Low	Platform End-of-Life
Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness.	+1.7 pts	Low	Knowledge Freshness
Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 2 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once.	+1.3 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 403 files carrying findings, judged against the Preview bar: 1% slop · 21% mixed · 78% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	0.0	Slop	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	1.4	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	1.6	Slop	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	2.3	Slop	Dependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.3	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.4	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.7	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	3.7	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs	5.6	Mixed	Cognitive Complexity: InletCommand::parse_args (cognitive 40)
implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs	5.7	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (14 lines × 2)
REDACTED	5.7	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED

How the grades work

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

Critical — 59

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 — 784

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 — 71

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

Could not be resolved — 40

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. 41 of 46 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 5 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 46 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D12D13D15D16D17D19D20D21D22D26D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D43D44AX10AX3AX4AX9DM4DM5DM6ES1ES2M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P6PF3

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, 845 of 914 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 01a0f17a-d160-7e11-bc3f-0e1d0db55690.

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 (.exs, .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 — `mix test --cover` with `excoveralls` (`mix coveralls.lcov`), or 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 — `mix test --cover` with `excoveralls` (`mix coveralls.lcov`), or 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 (.exs, .rs) and this repository declares a Cargo test suite (repository root, 258 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.
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.
P8 Schema migrations — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. The schema may be created by a runner, a deploy script or a config file outside what this check reads, so an absence here is our blind spot rather than a missing migration strategy. The card abstains instead of scoring. You can widen what we reach: if the schema is created and evolved by a tool this check does not name, naming it lets us teach the detector to read it.
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.
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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript was found in 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.
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.
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.
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. X7 measured the part of this repository it reads (C#, Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, Rust and Go), and its Elixir, Erlang source is outside the check's reach, so the card covers only part of the product. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the unread source is free of silent defaults.

Repo exclusion declarations: 10 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 REDACTED Scanning: REDACTED 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 REDACTED (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.
DM4 Rich vs anemic domain model: Behaviour is detected as state mutation inside a method body — a method that enforces an invariant by validating-and-throwing without mutating reads as a query, and mutation delegated through an interface the scan can't resolve isn't credited; entities with zero public properties still drop out of the population. It detects that state changes, not whether the rule is correct.
DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of 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 (5): D19, D21, D22, D26, 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 Complexity7.5 / 10Strong✓ 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 7.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

14 function(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was ockam_abac::eval::eval at 58. A further 9 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 NodeManagerWorker::handle_request at 55 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 5 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold functions was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/worker.rs (NodeManagerWorker::handle_request at 55), implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/subcommand.rs (OckamSubcommand::run at 44), implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_core/src/error.rs (TransportError::fmt at 37), implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/boolean_expr.rs (BooleanExpr::fmt at 21), implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_vault/src/error.rs (VaultError::fmt at 17). 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.

Expr::fmt (cyclomatic 19) · ×3implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:260

ockam_abac::eval::eval (cyclomatic 58) · ×2implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/eval.rs:10

ockam_command::node::util::spawn_node (cyclomatic 27) · ×2implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/util.rs:57

CreateCommand::spawn_background_node (cyclomatic 16) · ×2implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/authority/create.rs:134

NodeConfig::merge (cyclomatic 26)implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/config.rs:161

+ 4 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 3 Expr finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with expr.rs (2), migration_20240111100002_delete_trust_context.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 ockam_abac finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with eval.rs, parser.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 ockam_command finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with util.rs, mod.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 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 Complexity5.7 / 10Adequate✓ 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 5.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

60 function(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was ockam_abac::eval::eval at 129.

CreateCommand::start_services (cognitive 39) · ×4implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/foreground.rs:195

Expr::equals (cognitive 30) · ×4implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:84

ockam_api::control_api::backend::ticket::create_encoded_ticket (cognitive 19) · ×4implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/ticket.rs:128

ockam_abac::eval::eval (cognitive 129) · ×3implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/eval.rs:10

ockam_command::markdown::generate_markdown_page (cognitive 35) · ×2implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/markdown/mod.rs:132

+ 38 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 4 CreateCommand finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with create.rs (3), foreground.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 Expr finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with expr.rs (3), migration_20240111100002_delete_trust_context.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 ockam_api finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with ticket.rs (2), tcp_inlet_create.rs, exporting_configuration.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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 Classes9.2 / 10Stronggated by 32 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

32 god class(es) detected.

MethodTooLong: DevNodeCommand.run · ×10implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:117

TooManyMethods: CliState · ×8implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/cli_state.rs:43

FunctionTooLong: ockam_abac::eval::eval · ×4implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/eval.rs:10

FileTooLong: src/api.rs · ×4implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/api.rs

TooManyFunctions: attribute_rule_grammar · ×3implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_abac/src/attribute_rule_grammar.erl:1

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

What to do

Resolve the 10 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with dev.rs, worker.rs, node_manager.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (10 warning-level).
Resolve the 8 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with cli_state.rs, manager.rs, worker.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with eval.rs, parser.rs, util.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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 Duplication9.4 / 10Stronggated by 205 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 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

192 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 13 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. 5 of the 205 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population.

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×16implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:95

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×15implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:134

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×15implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/remote/lifecycle.rs:83

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×13implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:99

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×12implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:307

+ 64 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 16 Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with create.rs (2), expr.rs, state.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (16 warning-level).
Resolve the 15 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with portal_worker.rs (2), show.rs (2), expr.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (15 warning-level).
Resolve the 15 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with mutex.rs (2), lifecycle.rs, acceptor_worker.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (15 warning-level).
Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D5 · Coupling9.0 / 10Stronggated by 3 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

28 production modules (Cargo+OTP), 0 dependency cycle(s), 2 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 1 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 17 of the 28 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, or have no source directory of their own).

Unstable project ockam (Cargo)

Unstable project ockam_api

Off the main sequence: ockam_core

What to do

Resolve the 1 Unstable project ockam (Cargo) finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Unstable project ockam_api finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence 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)9.8 / 10Stronggated by 11 serious findings✓ 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 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

11 of 585 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: RelayServiceOptions (LCOM4 7) · ×11implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/relay_service/options.rs:10

What to do

Resolve the 11 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with options.rs (5), deploy.rs, handshake.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 warning-level).
Enforce Cohesion (LCOM4) in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.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

699 test methods: 499 unit, 200 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The Rust suite contributes 699 `#[test]` function(s) across 258 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 63 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 Hygiene7.3 / 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 7.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

38 outdated, 0 retired direct Hex dependencies, 3 pinning defect(s). Whether any of these packages is UNMAINTAINED is not graded — hex.pm publishes no maintenance status, and release age does not stand in for one. Whether any is UNUSED is not graded either: a Hex app name does not determine the modules it provides (`ecto_sql` provides Ecto.Adapters.SQL), and a large idiomatic class of BEAM dependencies — runtime adapters, codec plugins, protocol implementations and OTP applications the release starts — is correctly declared and never referenced in source, so absence of a reference is not evidence of an unused dependency. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question, read from REDACTED there.

Floating source dependency: neotoma · ×3

Outdated: cbor · ×38

What to do

Resolve the 3 Floating source dependency finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D13 · REDACTED 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

REDACTED 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 Hotspots10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D16 · Bus Factor9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

14 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs. Counted over 699 of the 1281 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

Further sole-owners (lower concentration)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt9.5 / 10Stronggated by 382 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 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

382 deducted task-comment markers across 156143 LoC (0.2/KLoC) → score 9.5. 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 · ×332implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/worker.ex:177

FixmeComment · ×48implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/error.rs:12

HackComment · ×2implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/test/ockam/secure_channel_test.exs:277

What to do

Resolve the 332 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with executor.rs (12), mod.rs (9), lib.rs (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (332 warning-level).
Resolve the 48 FixmeComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with sender.rs (12), mod.rs (9), listener.rs (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (48 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 HackComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with secure_channel_test.exs, common.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 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 QualityExemplary◐ 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 Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The repository's root README and the implementations directories each document their own tiers (root is a project overview with install of Ockam Command; implementations/rust/README.md and implementations/elixir/README.md are directory READMEs). The architecture/design docs markdown file ockam_core/README.md gives an overview plus features, usage, license, and a clipped full outline. All visible documents are clear and complete for their scope. (8 of 25 sampled documents could not be assessed: 1 of 2 evaluation groups failed.)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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 ConsistencyAdequate◐ 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 Adequate / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

5 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 676 exposed types.

Duplicate functionality for creating relays. `Node` has `create_relay` and `create_static_relay`, while the `RemoteRelay` type also exposes `create` and `create_static` with nearly identical signatures (except `RemoteRelay` takes `Context` explicitly). This creates confusion about whether to use the Node method or the RemoteRelay static method.

Inconsistent naming and parameter handling for message sending. `send` takes a generic `route: R` while others take `impl Into<Route>`. `send` and `send_extended` do not return a response, while `send_and_receive` and `send_and_receive_extended` do. The naming convention switches between `send` and `send_and_receive` without a clear parallel structure for the 'extended' variants (e.g., is there a `send_extended` that returns? No, but `send_and_receive_extended` exists).

Confusingly similar methods for retrieving identity information. `get_named_identity` vs `get_named_identity_or_default` vs `get_identity_by_optional_name` vs `get_identifier_by_optional_name`. It is unclear when to use 'optional' vs 'default' vs direct lookup, and whether the return type is the full Identity, just the Identifier, or a NamedIdentity struct.

Inconsistent method naming for identity creation. `create_identity_with_name_and_vault` vs `create_identity_with_name` vs `create_identity_with_key_id`. The parameters are not consistently ordered or named, and the distinction between 'with_name' and 'with_name_and_vault' is unclear (does 'with_name' use a default vault?).

Inconsistent naming pattern for space retrieval compared to identity retrieval. `get_space_by_name` vs `get_space_by_name_or_default` vs `get_default_space`. While similar to the identity issue, the presence of `get_default_space` as a separate method without a name argument is inconsistent with `get_named_identity_or_default` which takes a name.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Duplicate functionality for creating relays. `Node` has `create_relay`… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming and parameter handling for message sending. `send`… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Confusingly similar methods for retrieving identity information.… 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 Cohesion5.4 / 10Adequate✓ 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 5.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

5 of 20 build units (Cargo) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node

What to do

Resolve the 1 Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: REDACTED 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 4.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

6 finding(s): 0 critical, 6 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 6 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)0.1 / 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 0.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

35 finding(s): 0 critical, 32 high, 3 medium, 0 low. 2 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 5 file(s) — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs`, `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/err_demo_config_files/1.missing-colon.json`, `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/err_demo_config_files/1.missing-colon.yaml`, `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/err_demo_config_files/2.missing-comma.json`, `tools/scripts/release/parseCrates.sh` (line 48) — 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 11 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 12 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (10), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 issue-level).
Resolve the 11 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED (3), REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 issue-level).
Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) charged to Static Analysis (SAST) — the other 2 are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which charges them once. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level, 3 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 Vulnerabilities0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

49 finding(s): 1 critical, 13 high, 29 medium, 4 low. 3 advisory suppression(s) declared in REDACTED, 2 stale.

REDACTED

+ 3 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 13 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (8), REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (13 issue-level).
Resolve the 13 Medium advisory (unmaintained) finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (13). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (13 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Critical CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security6.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

24 finding(s): 0 critical, 6 high, 11 medium, 7 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 6 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (5), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 issue-level).
Resolve the 11 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (6), REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 warning-level).
Resolve the 7 Low IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (7). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 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 Freshness2.0 / 10Critical✓ 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 2.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

564 of 699 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is REDACTED. Counted over 699 of the 1281 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Most significant orphaned file · ×3implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/interceptor.rs

Dormant codebase

What to do

Resolve the 3 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with interceptor.rs, lib.rs, session.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D35 · Change Coupling9.9 / 10Stronggated by 21 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 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: inlet.rs↔outlet.rs 90%; controller_client.rs↔node_service_client.rs 82%; delete.rs↔show.rs 70%

Change coupling: inlet.rs ↔ outlet.rs · ×21implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs

What to do

Resolve the 21 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with create.rs (5), list.rs (3), delete.rs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (21 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

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

What to do

Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 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 warning-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. 3 advisory suppression(s) declared in REDACTED, 2 stale.

✓ 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 1 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 1.86

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 composition9.4 / 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?

DM4 · Rich vs anemic domain model7.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether domain entities own their behaviour (invariant-enforcing commands) rather than being data-only structs driven by a foreign service.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): entity method BODIES classified mutator-vs-query — only methods that mutate the entity's own declared state count as invariant-protecting behaviour, so a getter/passthrough doesn't rescue an anemic class. Deterministic, exhaustive over domain-layer entities.

Coverage: Population: entities by name/base convention; rich-vs-anemic judged by classifying each method body mutator-vs-query — logic-bearing domain types outside the convention are invisible.

`Vault` is a data-only domain entity with `pub` mutable state and no invariant-enforcing behaviour of its own, while the repo holds the logic in a foreign service/manager/use-case — the anemic domain model. Move the behaviour onto the entity so it enforces its own invariants (or make it an immutable value object with private fields) rather than being driven from outside. — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/vault.rs:16

What to do

Move the domain logic onto the entity (invariant-enforcing `&mut self` commands) instead of a foreign service.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM5 · Encapsulated state10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether a domain type's identity-bearing field stays immutable — a `pub` mutable field under a hand-rolled Hash/PartialEq breaks the value-identity invariant.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): entities scanned for publicly writable state — public setters, and (C#/VB) own mutable collections handed out through an auto-property, a public field or a bare-field expression getter, where a computed/copying getter is never charged. One finding per entity; score softened when Marten/EF rehydration frameworks present. Deterministic, framework-aware.

Coverage: Population: entities by convention; encapsulation (setter shape) checked exhaustively within the set.

Do you agree with this assessment?

DM6 · Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether the domain layer stays free of infrastructure dependencies — a domain aggregate fused to a persistence ORM (diesel/sea-orm/sqlx) on its own declaration (active-record) couples the domain to infrastructure. The clean-architecture dependency rule.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): domain-layer types scanned for infrastructure usage in member SIGNATURES and inside method/accessor BODIES — resolved calls and object-creations into EF/Marten/HTTP/Mongo/Redis/message-bus types (not just a namespace allowlist). Deterministic, symbol-resolved, exhaustive over domain-layer bodies, DDD-native.

Coverage: Domain layer identified by NAMESPACE heuristic; infrastructure then resolved by symbol in member SIGNATURES and method/accessor BODIES — rename the layer and the check evaporates.

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)6.2 / 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.

The root README is 35 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.

What to do

Expand the README with getting-started, architecture overview and a project map.
Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
Add a README to the 8 of 38 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 0.4 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?

P10 · Library API & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability8.9 / 10Exemplary✓ 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 23/24 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_macros`.

What to do

Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
Add a health-check endpoint (a /health route on your axum/actix router) so orchestrators and load balancers can probe liveness/readiness.

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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?

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	86%	Strong	Solid.
Architecture	94%	Exemplary	Solid.
Maturity	53%	Adequate — gated by D34, M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	85%	Exemplary	Solid.
Security	42%	Weak — gated by D29, D30, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Domain Modelling	91%	Exemplary	Solid.
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 — 78 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: the BEAM has no dependency-injection container — state lives in processes, and no process is handed an instance whose lifetime another one scopes; Rust with no dependency-injection crate has no container to hand one lifetime's instance to another — every value is owned by the code that builds it, and the borrow checker rejects a longer-lived value keeping a borrow of a shorter-lived one.
AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No function in this Python code is served by a threaded web framework (a Flask, Bottle or FastAPI route, a Django or Pyramid view), so no module is shared between request threads. Elixir processes share no mutable memory — state lives in a process's own mailbox — so there is no shared object to race on. Erlang processes share no mutable memory — state lives in a process's own mailbox — so there is no shared object to race on. Rust's compiler refuses unsynchronised shared mutation — a value shared across threads must be Sync — so the race this check looks for cannot be written.
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 100) — 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 — ~19730 lines of test source are present (.exs, .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 — Not scored — this repository's 833 shipped crate(s) were read from its REDACTED, but crates.io could not be asked for the licence of 36 of them (HTTP 429 Unknown Error), and a licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. Nothing is asserted about this repository's licensing in either direction.
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 Aggregate boundaries — this Rust crate declares no domain aggregate (a struct with private state and its own command methods), so DM1's aggregate-boundary read has no population to be taken over
DM2 Strongly-typed ids — the crate defines newtype typed-ids but declares no domain aggregate that could carry an id — so DM2's adoption ratio has no population to be taken over
DM3 Integration-event coupling — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
DM7 Repository granularity — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
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
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'.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the Elixir, Erlang, Rust source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P8 Schema migrations — sqlx is declared, but the schema-migration mechanism could not be identified. Our limit, not a verdict on this repository.
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (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 applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `#[bench]`, criterion's `bench_function`/`bench_with_input`, `#[divan::bench]` or `#[library_benchmark]` in any `.rs` file, or criterion, divan, iai or a `[[bench]]` target in a Cargo.toml, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: Rust spells out every heap allocation and makes borrowed slices (&[T], &str) its ordinary parameter types, so the allocation-aware style this card rewards elsewhere is the language's baseline rather than a rung to climb. Elixir runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
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 — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
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 — 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
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.
X31 Test-only surface in a production module — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and 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 — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 59 finding(s)

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×13

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

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

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

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D28 · Secrets (history) · REDACTED · ×6

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×6

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE · ×1

REDACTED

DM4 · Rich vs anemic domain model · Anemic domain model · ×1

Anemic domain model: Vault implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/vault.rs:16 — `Vault` is a data-only domain entity with `pub` mutable state and no invariant-enforcing behaviour of its own, while the repo holds the logic in a foreign service/manager/use-case — the anemic domain model. Move the behaviour onto the entity so it enforces its own invariants (or make it an immutable value object with private fields) rather than being driven from outside.

Serious — 784 finding(s)

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×332

TodoComment implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/worker.ex:177 — ## TODO: a better way to handle failing start — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/worker.ex:201 — ## TODO: validate address format — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/worker.ex:460 — ## TODO: improve metadata — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/router.ex:118 — ## TODO: require and match :ok result — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/node.ex:93 — ## TODO: currently taking just one random address per pid, make sure it's primary — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/node.ex:168 — ## TODO: make address actually fit into length in bytes — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/node.ex:202 — ## TODO: recursion limit — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/asymmetric_worker.ex:35 — ## TODO: maybe think of better API than :sys.get_state — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/asymmetric_worker.ex:98 — ## TODO: use Address.value — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/address.ex:41 — ## TODO: handle errors — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/address.ex:51 — ## TODO: figure out a better API for address representation — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/api/client/discovery_client.ex:11 — ## TODO: API to register other workers (not self) — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/api/discovery/service_info.ex:41 — ## TODO: move that to mini_cbor — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/api/discovery/service_info.ex:59 — ## TODO: move that to mini_cbor — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/session/routing/data_worker.ex:25 — ## TODO: add forward_through? — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/identity/trust_policy.ex:64 — # ## TODO: do we want to update the contact if it's changed? — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/identity/identity.ex:79 — # TODO: rename to attest_secure_channel_key — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/identity/identity.ex:95 — # TODO: rename to verify_secure_channel_key_attestation — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/identity/identity.ex:116 — # TODO refactor so that subject is an identity instead of identifier — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/identity/identity.ex:161 — ## TODO: implement change history compare! — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/messaging/delivery/resend_pipe.ex:55 — ## TODO: batch send — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/messaging/delivery/resend_pipe.ex:84 — ## TODO: do we want to resend with an old ref 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/messaging/delivery/resend_pipe.ex:150 — ## TODO: should we use confirm_timer or unconfirmed? — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/messaging/ordering/strict/confirm_pipe.ex:11 — ## TODO: experiment with call-style waiting for confirm — 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 implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/messaging/pipe_channel/responder.ex:58 — ## TODO: addresses for other workers — 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.
+ 307 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · FixmeComment · ×48

FixmeComment implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/error.rs:12 — // FIXME: Duplication from ockam_identity::IdentityError — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/incoming.rs:9 — // FIXME: impl debug — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:170 — // FIXME: Copy&paste — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:198 — // FIXME: Copy&paste — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/enroll/enrollment.rs:129 — // FiXME: this has duplicate with AuthorityNodeClient — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/error/mod.rs:2 — // FIXME DONOTLAND — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/error/mod.rs:54 — // FIXME: figure out a better solution here... — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/error/inner/mod.rs:22 — // FIXME: `#[cfg()]`ing the fields out changes the serialization format. Not good. — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/error/inner/mod.rs:52 — // FIXME — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/privileged_portal/privileged_portals.rs:104 — // FIXME — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/privileged_portal/privileged_portals.rs:137 — // FIXME — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/privileged_portal/privileged_portals.rs:156 — // FIXME — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/privileged_portal/privileged_portals.rs:192 — // FIXME — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/routing/address.rs:98 — // FIXME: This should not panic... — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/error.rs:86 — // FIXME: fill these in with more meaningful error kinds — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/credentials/credentials_verification.rs:180 — // FIXME: Verify if Schema aligns with Attributes — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/mod.rs:170 — // FIXME: fix the implementation so this test pass. — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/listener.rs:53 — // FIXME: add ABAC policies for the key_exchange_only listener? — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/access_control/credential_access_control.rs:14 — // FIXME: Can we use ABAC 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.
FixmeComment implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channels/secure_channels_builder.rs:18 — // FIXME: This is very strange dependency — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channels/secure_channels.rs:228 — // FIXME: All other addresses except these two are random and incorrect, we don't use them — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/tests/channel.rs:176 — //FIXME: only the last credential is kept around in the storage — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/tests/channel.rs:197 — //FIXME: only the last credential is kept around in the storage — 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 implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/rwlock.rs:7 — // FIXME: Completely unsafe async RwLock implementation — 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 REDACTED:283 — // FIXME: We should be careful if we run multiple nodes in one process — 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.
+ 23 more in this group — see findings.md.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×21

Change coupling: inlet.rs ↔ outlet.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs` change together 90% of the time (9 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 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `7f4235bc` feat: add timeout to `zone inlet/outlet` creation when waiting for th…; `f820d1f8` feat(rust): improvements to cluster outlet command (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/inlet.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/outlet.rs`); `1271ff4f` feat: add `background` argument to `cluster inlet/outlet` (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/inlet.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/outlet.rs`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: controller_client.rs ↔ node_service_client.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/controller_client.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/controller_client.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs` change together 82% of the time (9 of the 11 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 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `2cdd831d` Add dev enrollment ticket for gateway portal in dev mode; `d24499c9` Add user-level development token support for zone dev; `09a2fea6` Add create_gateway_token to AiPlatformApi trait — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: delete.rs ↔ show.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/space/delete.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/space/delete.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/space/show.rs` change together 70% of the time (7 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 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `d72f79e7` refactor(rust): add plural terms for `tui` traits; `fdb22e2e` refactor(rust): make it easier to write commands' api req/res handlers; `d7256de9` feat(rust): rename ockam command output format option — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: create.rs ↔ delete.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/create.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/delete.rs` change together 69% of the time (11 of the 16 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 11 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `59583f09` feat(rust): unify output of crud tcp-connection commands; `d7b2fdd7` fix(rust): add worker address to the output of `tcp-connection create`; `437625c0` docs(rust): include documentation in tcp commands — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: list.rs ↔ show.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/list.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/list.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/show.rs` change together 65% of the time (15 of the 23 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 15 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `55bf8627` refactor(rust): add trait to tuify `show` commands; `692494fc` feat(rust): make `node show` interactive; `ed04005c` feat(rust): print default alongside node name — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: registry.rs ↔ service.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/registry.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/registry.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service.rs` change together 63% of the time (26 of the 41 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 26 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `d32e00a3` feat(rust): added the possibility to overwrite http headers in inlets; `2373bff8` refactor(rust): adjust the node manager worker for deleting kafka ser…; `6d80e1bd` refactor(rust): adjust the code after rebase — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: create.rs ↔ list.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/create.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/listener/list.rs` change together 62% of the time (8 of the 13 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 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `437625c0` docs(rust): include documentation in tcp commands; `939eccb4` feat(rust): improve tcp command ux; `8518a608` feat(rust): get rid of `NodeManager` transport registry — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: create.rs ↔ list.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/listener/create.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/listener/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/listener/list.rs` change together 62% of the time (8 of the 13 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 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `437625c0` docs(rust): include documentation in tcp commands; `939eccb4` feat(rust): improve tcp command ux; `8ca9793f` feat(rust): `TCP` commands updates: — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: base_command.rs ↔ repl.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/base_command.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/base_command.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/repl.rs` change together 62% of the time (8 of the 13 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 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `80728def` refactor: split repl into attach/repl subcommands; `8254dca6` feat: after deploying a zone, show public http server url; `ebff732b` chore: cluster/zone renames — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: REDACTED ↔ space.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/enroll.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/enroll.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/space.rs` change together 57% of the time (20 of the 35 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 20 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `20926bd4` feat(rust): propagating the errors from api clients to the command (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/enroll.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/space.rs`); `81f73eab` feat(rust): create a relay to the default project after enrolling and… (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/enroll.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/space.rs`); `808c3725` refactor(rust): remove the need for a model state (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/enroll.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/space.rs`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: show.rs ↔ delete.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/show.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/show.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/space/delete.rs` change together 55% of the time (6 of the 11 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 `d72f79e7` refactor(rust): add plural terms for `tui` traits; `d7256de9` feat(rust): rename ockam command output format option; `9eb80b76` refactor(rust): rename `NODEMAN_ADDR` to `NODEMANAGER_ADDR` — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: config.rs ↔ start.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/service/config.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/service/config.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/service/start.rs` change together 54% of the time (7 of the 13 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 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `fcb95056` feat(rust): add flag to reload enrollers from a file; `7dbe8f3b` feat(rust): support json configuration for enrollers; `746ce0b1` feat(rust): make the okta tenant config more generic — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: node_service_client.rs ↔ create.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/create.rs` change together 54% of the time (7 of the 13 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 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `d2b5156d` feat: in `cluster create`, parallelize `docker build` calls (at that commit the file was still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/create.rs`); `22e198ca` feat(rust): adjustments for public eks (at that commit the file was still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/create.rs`); `83390293` feat(rust): add cluster cbor struct (at that commit the file was still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/create.rs`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: create.rs ↔ delete.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/create.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/delete.rs` change together 53% of the time (8 of the 15 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 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `97780be0` refactor(rust): improve error messages returned when parsing the node…; `d973283b` fix(rust): replace atty dependency with is-terminal; `1510927e` docs(rust): codespell implementations/rust/ — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: list.rs ↔ delete.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/list.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/list.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/listener/delete.rs` change together 52% of the time (11 of the 21 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 11 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `53745c66` docs(rust): update command docs; `437625c0` docs(rust): include documentation in tcp commands; `8518a608` feat(rust): get rid of `NodeManager` transport registry — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: command.rs ↔ oidc_service.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/enroll/command.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/enroll/command.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/enroll/oidc_service.rs` change together 52% of the time (11 of the 21 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 11 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `84a02edf` feat(rust): add ai subcommands for enroll and ticket; `d11b610e` feat: adjust `enroll` logic and output for the new subscription plans; `7fff1f6d` feat(rust): improve output for `enroll` command — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: services.rs ↔ service.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/models/services.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/models/services.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service.rs` change together 52% of the time (15 of the 29 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 `411fbad6` fix(rust): use the outlet socket address to search for the outlet status; `63f5bc2e` feat(rust): added a direct local kafka for simple deployments and fix…; `1f0b5670` feat(rust): add delete and list subcommands for kafka consumer/produc… — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: addon.rs ↔ REDACTED implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/addon.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/addon.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/enroll.rs` change together 50% of the time (7 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 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 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `20926bd4` feat(rust): propagating the errors from api clients to the command (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/addon.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/enroll.rs`); `a15b679a` refactor(rust): create tcp_connection along with secure channels in t… (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/addon.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/enroll.rs`); `0c34429b` feat(rust): parse `/node/n1` to `/worker/addr` after connecting to th… (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/addon.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cloud/enroll.rs`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: delete.rs ↔ inlet.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/delete.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/delete.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.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 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 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `c871e4bb` refactor: cluster arguments (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/delete.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/inlet.rs`); `bf8b3582` fix: get cluster always from orchestrator (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/delete.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/inlet.rs`); `22e198ca` feat(rust): adjustments for public eks (at that commit the files were still `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/delete.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/inlet.rs`) — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: create.rs ↔ delete.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/create.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/delete.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 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 6 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `65ca55c0` fix(rust): when deleting the default vault/identity/project the data …; `d7256de9` feat(rust): rename ockam command output format option; `9eb80b76` refactor(rust): rename `NODEMAN_ADDR` to `NODEMANAGER_ADDR` — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: list.rs ↔ create.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/list.rs — `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/list.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/outlet/create.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 — 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 5 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `6523dfb2` feat(rust): unify output of show/list portals commands; `d11b610e` feat: adjust `enroll` logic and output for the new subscription plans; `a60c95ef` docs(rust): update docs for tcp-outlet commands — run `git show` on any of them.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×16

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:95 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:95-101 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:103-109 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/http/state.rs:39 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/http/state.rs:39-45 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/http/state.rs:85-91 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/portal.rs:229 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/portal.rs:229-235 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/kafka_services.rs:276-282 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/create.rs:143 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/create.rs:143-149 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/outlet/create.rs:68-74 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/ticket.rs:283 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/ticket.rs:283-289 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/ticket.rs:99-105 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/routing/message/transport_message.rs:205 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/routing/message/transport_message.rs:205-211 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/routing/message/transport_message.rs:304-310 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:333 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:333-339 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:353-359 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/relay/delete.rs:94 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/relay/delete.rs:94-100 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/relay/show.rs:96-102 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/options.rs:282 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/options.rs:282-288 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/puncture/negotiation/options.rs:75-81 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:191 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:191-197 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs:182-188 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 103 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:306 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:306-313 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:139-145 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/remote/lifecycle.rs:75 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/remote/lifecycle.rs:75-81 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/remote/lifecycle.rs:117-123 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/transport/common.rs:28 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/transport/common.rs:28-34 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/transport/common.rs:43-49 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:55 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:55-61 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:104-110 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/relay/static_forwarding_api.ex:33 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/relay/static_forwarding_api.ex:33-39 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/token_lease_manager.ex:34-40 — 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 (7 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/transport/tcp/address.ex:15 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/transport/tcp/address.ex:15-21 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/transport/udp/address.ex:24-30 — 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 (9 lines × 2) · ×15

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:134 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:134-142 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:145-153 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/setup.rs:138 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/setup.rs:138-146 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/setup.rs:162-170 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:623 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:623-631 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:741-749 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_executor/src/executor.rs:140 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_executor/src/executor.rs:140-148 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_executor/src/executor.rs:153-161 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/processor_builder.rs:244 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/processor_builder.rs:244-252 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/worker_builder.rs:241-249 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:567 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:567-575 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:704-712 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/logging_options.rs:26 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/logging_options.rs:26-34 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/tracing_options.rs:21-29 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:173 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:173-181 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs:181-189 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 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 (9 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/identity/local_info.rs:65 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/identity/local_info.rs:65-73 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/transport/local_info.rs:65-73 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:577 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:577-587 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:714-722 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/addon/configure_influxdb.rs:165 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/addon/configure_influxdb.rs:165-173 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/addon/configure_okta.rs:140-149 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/policy/delete.rs:116 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/policy/delete.rs:116-124 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/policy/show.rs:112-120 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/show.rs:97 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/show.rs:97-105 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/outlet/show.rs:97-105 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/show.rs:110 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/show.rs:110-118 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/outlet/show.rs:117-125 — 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) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/api/request.ex:71 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/api/request.ex:71-79 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/api/response.ex:58-66 — 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 (8 lines × 2) · ×15

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/remote/lifecycle.rs:83 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/remote/lifecycle.rs:83-90 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/remote/lifecycle.rs:125-132 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:51 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:51-58 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs:63-70 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 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 (8 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/influxdb_api_client.rs:223 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/influxdb_api_client.rs:223-230 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/influxdb_api_client.rs:252-259 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/consumer/list.rs:25 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/consumer/list.rs:25-32 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/producer/list.rs:25-32 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:513 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:513-520 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs:224-231 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 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 (8 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:147 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:147-154 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs:147-154 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 103 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:247 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:247-254 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs:238-245 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 103 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/show.rs:65 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/show.rs:65-72 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/space/show.rs:63-70 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs:103 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs:103-110 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/ticket.rs:85-92 — 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 (8 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/debugger.rs:221 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/debugger.rs:221-229 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/debugger.rs:260-267 — 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/arguments.rs:59 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/arguments.rs:59-66 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/arguments.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 (8 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:214 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:214-221 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:85-92 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 (8 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:169 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:169-176 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:191-198 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/relay/static_forwarding_api.ex:21 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/relay/static_forwarding_api.ex:21-28 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/lib/services/token_lease_manager.ex:22-29 — 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) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/session/pluggable/initiator.ex:160 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/session/pluggable/initiator.ex:160-167 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/session/pluggable/responder.ex:83-91 — 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.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unmaintained) · ×13

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

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×13

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:99 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:99-103 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:116-120 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:97 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:97-101 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:101-105 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:103 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:103-107 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:119-123 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/parser.rs:113 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/parser.rs:113-117 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/parser.rs:122-126 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:76 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:76-81 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:120-124 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/types.rs:35 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/types.rs:35-39 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/lib.rs:104-108 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:412 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:412-416 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:244-248 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/lease/list.rs:64 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/lease/list.rs:64-68 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/lease/show.rs:76-80 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/models/transport/json.rs:35 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/models/transport/json.rs:35-39 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/util/mod.rs:50-54 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex:63 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex:63-67 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex:81-85 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/mini_cbor.ex:57 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/mini_cbor.ex:57-66 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_typed_cbor/lib/typed_cbor.ex:462-466 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/kafka_interceptor.ex:250 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/kafka_interceptor.ex:250-254 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/kafka_interceptor.ex:262-266 — 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 (5 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:91 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:91-95 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:113-117 — 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 (12 lines × 2) · ×12

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:307 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:307-318 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:383-394 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/connection/plain_tcp.rs:39 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/connection/plain_tcp.rs:39-50 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/connection/plain_udp.rs:38-49 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/outlet/create.rs:157 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/outlet/create.rs:157-168 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/outlet/create.rs:156-167 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/show.rs:57 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/show.rs:57-68 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/outlet/show.rs:64-75 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_macros/src/node_attribute.rs:151 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_macros/src/node_attribute.rs:151-162 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_macros/src/node_test_attribute.rs:231-242 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/options.rs:81 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/options.rs:81-92 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/options.rs:46-57 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:245 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:245-256 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:309-322 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:59 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:59-70 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:63-75 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/list.rs:65 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/list.rs:65-76 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/list.rs:80-91 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs:498 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs:498-509 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs:515-526 — 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.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/lease/list.rs:71 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/lease/list.rs:71-82 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/relays.rs:71-82 — 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 (12 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:277 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:277-288 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:298-309 — 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 (10 lines × 2) · ×12

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:81 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:81-90 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:86-95 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/ockam_tonic_logs_client.rs:73 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/ockam_tonic_logs_client.rs:73-82 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/ockam_tonic_traces_client.rs:73-82 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/consumer/delete.rs:24 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/consumer/delete.rs:24-33 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/producer/delete.rs:24-33 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project_admin/list.rs:46 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project_admin/list.rs:46-55 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/space_admin/list.rs:48-57 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:78 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:78-87 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:140-149 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_receiver.rs:159 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_receiver.rs:159-168 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:804-813 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/delete.rs:88 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/delete.rs:88-97 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/show.rs:89-98 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/vault/delete.rs:75 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/vault/delete.rs:75-84 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/vault/show.rs:78-87 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/relay/delete.rs:62 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/relay/delete.rs:62-71 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/relay/show.rs:65-74 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/util.rs:192 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/util.rs:192-202 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/util.rs:218-227 — 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 (10 lines × 2) REDACTED:88 — REDACTED:88-97 | REDACTED:179-188 — 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 (10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:448 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:448-457 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs:236-245 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 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.

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×11

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×11

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:261 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:261-274 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/storage/database/migrations/node_migrations/rust/sqlite/migration_20240111100002_delete_trust_context.rs:118-131 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/influxdb_inlets.rs:35 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/influxdb_inlets.rs:35-48 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/tcp_inlets.rs:35-48 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/influxdb_outlets.rs:35 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/influxdb_outlets.rs:35-48 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/tcp_outlets.rs:36-49 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/kafka_inlet.rs:35 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/kafka_inlet.rs:35-48 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/kafka_outlet.rs:37-50 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:117 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:117-130 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs:126-139 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:123 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:123-136 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:193-206 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/bin/brand.rs:242 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/bin/brand.rs:242-255 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/bin/brand.rs:258-275 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/relay/processor_relay.rs:111 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/relay/processor_relay.rs:111-124 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/relay/worker_relay.rs:177-190 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/privileged_portal/ebpf_support.rs:273 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/privileged_portal/ebpf_support.rs:273-286 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/privileged_portal/ebpf_support.rs:308-321 — 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 (14 lines × 2) REDACTED:85 — REDACTED:85-98 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/storage/database/migrations/node_migrations/rust/sqlite/migration_20240111100002_delete_trust_context.rs:74-87 — 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 (14 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/test_utils/mod.rs:151 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/test_utils/mod.rs:151-164 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/test_utils/mod.rs:301-314 — 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×11

Low cohesion: RelayServiceOptions (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/relay_service/options.rs:10 — RelayServiceOptions's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: DeployCommand (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs:37 — DeployCommand's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: HandshakeState (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:502 — HandshakeState's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TcpOutletOptions (LCOM4 7) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/options.rs:160 — TcpOutletOptions's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: NodeInfo (LCOM4 6) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/nodes.rs:506 — NodeInfo's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: SecureChannelOptions (LCOM4 6) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/options.rs:29 — SecureChannelOptions's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: Context (LCOM4 6) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/context/context.rs:26 — Context's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: Terminal (LCOM4 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/ui/terminal/mod.rs:47 — Terminal's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: SecureChannelListenerOptions (LCOM4 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/options.rs:177 — SecureChannelListenerOptions's methods fall into 5 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 5 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: ExportedIdentity (LCOM4 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/identity/export.rs:78 — ExportedIdentity's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: TcpConnectionOptions (LCOM4 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/options.rs:10 — TcpConnectionOptions's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×10

MethodTooLong: DevNodeCommand.run implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:117 — MethodTooLong — run runs 215 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 115 over it, 2.15× 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: NodeManagerWorker.handle_request implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/worker.rs:37 — MethodTooLong — handle_request 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.
MethodTooLong: NodeManager.create_inlet implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/tcp_inlets/node_manager.rs:26 — MethodTooLong — create_inlet runs 148 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 48 over it, 1.48× 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: InMemoryNode.start_kafka_inlet_service implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/kafka_services.rs:110 — MethodTooLong — start_kafka_inlet_service runs 110 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 10 over it, 1.10× 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: TicketNodeCommand.run implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project/ticket.rs:110 — MethodTooLong — run runs 108 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 8 over it, 1.08× 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: CreateCommand.run implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:190 — MethodTooLong — run runs 105 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 5 over it, 1.05× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: NodeManager.create implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/manager.rs:73 — MethodTooLong — create runs 103 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 3 over it, 1.03× 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: HttpControlNodeApiFrontend.route_request_impl implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/frontend.rs:172 — MethodTooLong — route_request_impl 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.
MethodTooLong: ProjectsSqlxDatabase.store_project implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:167 — MethodTooLong — store_project runs 101 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 1 over it, 1.01× 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: ReplCommand.open_repl implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/repl.rs:59 — MethodTooLong — open_repl runs 101 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 1 over it, 1.01× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×10

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:113 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:113-118 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:116-121 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/enrollments_repository_sql.rs:75 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/enrollments_repository_sql.rs:75-80 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/enrollments_repository_sql.rs:95-100 — 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 (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:522 — REDACTED:522-527 | REDACTED:537-542 — 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_uds/src/router/uds_router.rs:275 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_uds/src/router/uds_router.rs:275-280 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/router/mod.rs:145-150 — 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/purpose_keys/purpose_key_creation.rs:46 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/purpose_keys/purpose_key_creation.rs:46-51 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/purpose_keys/purpose_keys.rs:49-54 — 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_vault/src/software/vault_for_signing/vault_for_signing.rs:159 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_vault/src/software/vault_for_signing/vault_for_signing.rs:159-164 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_vault/src/software/vault_for_verifying_signatures.rs:45-50 — 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/identities.rs:159 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/identities.rs:159-166 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/vaults.rs:256-261 — 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/identities.rs:18 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/identities.rs:18-23 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/policies.rs:30-35 — 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex:102 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex:102-107 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/formatter.ex:123-128 — 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 (6 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/protocol/stream.ex:7 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/protocol/stream.ex:7-12 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/protocol/stream_partitioned.ex:7-12 — 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.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×8

TooManyMethods: CliState implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/cli_state.rs:43 — TooManyMethods — 159 methods, declared across 17 files: cli_state/cli_state.rs (33), cli_state/nodes.rs (27), cli_state/identities.rs (21), cli_state/vaults.rs (16), +13 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 129 over it, 5.30× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: NodeManager implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/manager.rs:56 — TooManyMethods — 85 methods, declared across 13 files: service/manager.rs (29), service/secure_channel.rs (11), orchestrator/secure_clients.rs (10), service/transport.rs (8), +9 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 55 over it, 2.83× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: NodeManagerWorker implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/worker.rs:15 — TooManyMethods — 56 methods, declared across 15 files: service/secure_channel.rs (8), service/transport.rs (8), service/node_services.rs (7), influxdb/portal.rs (4), +11 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 26 over it, 1.87× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Context implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/context/context.rs:26 — TooManyMethods — 51 methods, declared across 10 files: context/context.rs (15), context/send_message.rs (9), context/context_lifecycle.rs (7), context/worker_lifecycle.rs (6), +6 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 21 over it, 1.70× the bar. That list is where to read them, not a suggestion to split the file: the members belong to the type wherever they are declared, so moving them between files leaves the count unchanged. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Response implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/api.rs:656 — TooManyMethods — 35 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 5 over it, 1.17× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Terminal implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/ui/terminal/mod.rs:47 — TooManyMethods — 33 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 3 over it, 1.10× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: Node implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/node.rs:32 — TooManyMethods — 32 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 2 over it, 1.07× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: SqlxDatabase REDACTED:42 — TooManyMethods — 31 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 1 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×7

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/access_control/cache.rs:119 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/access_control/cache.rs:119-129 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/access_control/cache.rs:155-165 — 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 (11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:159 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:159-169 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake.rs:220-230 — 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 (11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/show.rs:48 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/show.rs:48-58 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/outlet/show.rs:48-58 — 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 (11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/processor_builder.rs:150 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/processor_builder.rs:150-160 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/worker_builder.rs:147-157 — 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 (11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/delete.rs:111 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/delete.rs:111-121 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/outlet/delete.rs:108-118 — 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 (11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:458 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:458-468 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs:247-257 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 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 (11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:156 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:156-166 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs:164-174 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 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.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium advisory (unsound) · ×6

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×6

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/api.rs:628 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/api.rs:628-642 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/api.rs:773-787 — 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 (15 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/transport_message.rs:83 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/transport_message.rs:83-97 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/messages/routing_message.rs:81-95 — 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 (15 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/sidecar/secure_relay_inlet.rs:71 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/sidecar/secure_relay_inlet.rs:71-85 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/sidecar/secure_relay_outlet.rs:70-84 — 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 (15 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:431 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:431-445 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:257-271 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 (15 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:148 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:148-162 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/users_repository_sql.rs:48-62 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/users_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 35 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 (15 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/stream/client/consumer.ex:313 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/stream/client/consumer.ex:313-327 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/stream/client/publisher.ex:245-259 — 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.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) · ×5

Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/multiaddr_resolver/local_resolver.rs:16 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/multiaddr_resolver/local_resolver.rs:16-33 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/multiaddr_resolver/transport_route_resolver.rs:88-105 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/inlet.rs:228 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/inlet.rs:228-245 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/outlet.rs:161-178 — 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 (18 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs:68 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs:68-85 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/service.rs:79-96 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/service.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 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 (18 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/delete.rs:95 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/delete.rs:95-112 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/show.rs:95-112 — 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 (18 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/relay/processor_relay.rs:126 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/relay/processor_relay.rs:126-143 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/relay/worker_relay.rs:192-209 — 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 (16 lines × 2) · ×5

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/session/session.rs:452 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/session/session.rs:452-467 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/session/session.rs:558-573 — 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 (16 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:489 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:489-504 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:528-543 — 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 (16 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:202 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:202-217 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:263-278 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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 (16 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:296 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:296-311 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:404-419 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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 (16 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project_member/list.rs:72 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project_member/list.rs:72-87 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project_member/list_ids.rs:61-76 — 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 (13 lines × 2) · ×5

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/ui/colors.rs:25 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/ui/colors.rs:25-37 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/ui/mod.rs:26-38 — 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 (13 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:222 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:222-234 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:93-105 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 (13 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/lease_issuer/worker.rs:125 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/lease_issuer/worker.rs:125-137 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/worker.rs:319-331 — 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 (13 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:221 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:221-233 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:282-294 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/parser.ex:71 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/parser.ex:71-83 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/parser.ex:87-99 — 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CreateCommand · ×4

CreateCommand::start_services (cognitive 39) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/foreground.rs:195 — CreateCommand::start_services has cognitive complexity 39 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (29 pts), match/switch 2 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 27). 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.
CreateCommand::run (cognitive 31) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:190 — CreateCommand::run has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (25 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (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.
CreateCommand::run (cognitive 21) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:168 — CreateCommand::run has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (17 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.
CreateCommand::parse_args (cognitive 21) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create.rs:274 — CreateCommand::parse_args has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), boolean chains 3, 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 · Expr · ×4

Expr::equals (cognitive 30) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:84 — Expr::equals has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (21 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 19). 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.
Expr::fmt (cognitive 27) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:260 — Expr::fmt has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (18 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), match/switch 1 (2 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.
Expr::fmt (cognitive 27) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/storage/database/migrations/node_migrations/rust/sqlite/migration_20240111100002_delete_trust_context.rs:117 — Expr::fmt has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (18 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), match/switch 1 (2 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.
Expr::compare (cognitive 21) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:120 — Expr::compare has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (10 pts), loops 3 (9 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (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 · ockam_api · ×4

ockam_api::control_api::backend::ticket::create_encoded_ticket (cognitive 19) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/ticket.rs:128 — ockam_api::control_api::backend::ticket::create_encoded_ticket has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (18 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.
ockam_api::common_api::tcp_inlet_create::parse_to_address (cognitive 18) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/common_api/tcp_inlet_create.rs:11 — ockam_api::common_api::tcp_inlet_create::parse_to_address has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (15 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (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.
ockam_api::logs::exporting_configuration::opentelemetry_endpoint (cognitive 17) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/exporting_configuration.rs:443 — ockam_api::logs::exporting_configuration::opentelemetry_endpoint has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 6). 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.
ockam_api::control_api::backend::ticket::handle_ticket_enroll (cognitive 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/ticket.rs:281 — ockam_api::control_api::backend::ticket::handle_ticket_enroll has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), match/switch 3 (4 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.

D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×4

FunctionTooLong: ockam_abac::eval::eval implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/eval.rs:10 — FunctionTooLong — ockam_abac::eval::eval runs 178 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 78 over it, 1.78× 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: ockam_abac::parser::parse implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/parser.rs:27 — FunctionTooLong — ockam_abac::parser::parse 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.
FunctionTooLong: ockam_command::node::util::spawn_node implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/util.rs:57 — FunctionTooLong — ockam_command::node::util::spawn_node runs 105 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 5 over it, 1.05× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: ockam_api::control_api::backend::ticket::create_encoded_ticket implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/ticket.rs:128 — FunctionTooLong — ockam_api::control_api::backend::ticket::create_encoded_ticket runs 101 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 1 over it, 1.01× 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 · FileTooLong · ×4

FileTooLong: src/api.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/api.rs — FileTooLong — 653 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 153 over it, 1.31× 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: portal/portal_worker.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs — FileTooLong — 582 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 91% of them inside a single declaration: TcpPortalWorker (5 blocks, 66-823). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 82 over it, 1.16× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: zone/dev.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs — FileTooLong — 574 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 74 over it, 1.15× 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: service/manager.rs implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/manager.rs — FileTooLong — 547 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 83% of them inside a single declaration: NodeManager (2 blocks, 56-694). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 47 over it, 1.09× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.

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

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:92 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:92-103 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:108-120 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:97-107 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:112-123 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/credential_issuer/credential_issuer_worker.rs:54 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/credential_issuer/credential_issuer_worker.rs:54-95 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:45-140 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:34-70 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs:46-92 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/listener/list.rs:39 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/listener/list.rs:39-70 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/service/list.rs:28-60 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/listener/list.rs:34-63 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/worker/list.rs:38-64 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/router/mod.rs:150 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/router/mod.rs:150-194 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/router/mod.rs:78-126 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/workers/sender.rs:49-85 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/workers/sender.rs:94-130 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Expr · ×3

Expr::fmt (cyclomatic 19) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:260 — Expr::fmt has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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.
Expr::equals (cyclomatic 18) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:84 — Expr::equals 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.
Expr::fmt (cyclomatic 18) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/storage/database/migrations/node_migrations/rust/sqlite/migration_20240111100002_delete_trust_context.rs:117 — Expr::fmt 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.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Floating source dependency · ×3

Floating source dependency: neotoma — Runtime dependency `:neotoma` is fetched from source in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_abac/mix.exs and names no revision at all, so it tracks the default branch — the declaration pins no immutable revision, so `mix deps.update` moves this dependency to code nobody reviewed. Pin it with `ref:` (a full commit SHA) or `tag:`.
Floating source dependency: brod — Runtime dependency `:brod` is fetched from source in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/mix.exs and tracks a branch — the declaration pins no immutable revision, so `mix deps.update` moves this dependency to code nobody reviewed. Pin it with `ref:` (a full commit SHA) or `tag:`.
Floating source dependency: rustler — Runtime dependency `:rustler` is fetched from source in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_rust_elixir_nifs/mix.exs and tracks a branch — the declaration pins no immutable revision, so `mix deps.update` moves this dependency to code nobody reviewed. Pin it with `ref:` (a full commit SHA) or `tag:`.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ockam_abac · ×3

ockam_abac::eval::eval (cognitive 129) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/eval.rs:10 — ockam_abac::eval::eval has cognitive complexity 129 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (61 pts), loops 9 (38 pts), match/switch 9 (30 pts) (nesting depth added 96). 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.
ockam_abac::parser::parse (cognitive 58) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/parser.rs:27 — ockam_abac::parser::parse has cognitive complexity 58 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (24 pts), match/switch 8 (24 pts), loops 4 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 37). 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.
ockam_abac::bin::repl::main (cognitive 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/bin/repl.rs:22 — ockam_abac::bin::repl::main has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 3 (11 pts), if/else 2 (4 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). 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.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyFunctions · ×3

TooManyFunctions: attribute_rule_grammar implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_abac/src/attribute_rule_grammar.erl:1 — TooManyFunctions — 59 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 29 over it, 1.97× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: Channel implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/secure_channel/channel.ex:1 — TooManyFunctions — 36 functions. The bar is 30 functions; this is 6 over it, 1.20× the bar. The counted members are a module's functions — a module holds no instance state, so there is no shared data to group them by and no type to move them onto. To reduce it, extract each cohesive family of functions into a new module of its own and have this one delegate to it, so no single module carries every responsibility.
TooManyFunctions: ockam_api::logs::exporting_configuration implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/exporting_configuration.rs:252 — TooManyFunctions — 32 free functions. The bar is 30 free functions; this is 2 over it, 1.07× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×3

ClassTooLong: TcpPortalWorker implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:66 — ClassTooLong — 528 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 19 methods, 5 blocks, lines 66-823. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 128 over it, 1.32× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: NodeManager implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/manager.rs:56 — ClassTooLong — 454 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 85 methods, 2 blocks, lines 56-694. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 54 over it, 1.14× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: EnrollHandler implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/enroll/handler.rs:41 — ClassTooLong — 430 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 10 methods, 3 blocks, lines 41-643. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 30 over it, 1.08× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs:87 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs:87-103 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/service.rs:98-114 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/service.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 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 (17 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:89 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:89-105 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs:89-105 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 103 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 (17 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/incoming.rs:19 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/incoming.rs:19-35 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/outgoing.rs:28-44 — 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 (5 lines × 3) · ×3

Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:120 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:120-124 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:129-133 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:62-66 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:396 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:396-400 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:228-232 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/users_repository_sql.rs:121-125 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 (5 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/create.rs:43 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/create.rs:43-47 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/secret.rs:50-54 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/ticket.rs:54-58 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ockam_abac · ×2

ockam_abac::eval::eval (cyclomatic 58) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/eval.rs:10 — ockam_abac::eval::eval has cyclomatic complexity 58 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
ockam_abac::parser::parse (cyclomatic 47) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/parser.rs:27 — ockam_abac::parser::parse has cyclomatic complexity 47 (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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ockam_command · ×2

ockam_command::node::util::spawn_node (cyclomatic 27) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/util.rs:57 — ockam_command::node::util::spawn_node 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.
ockam_command::markdown::generate_markdown_page (cyclomatic 19) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/markdown/mod.rs:132 — ockam_command::markdown::generate_markdown_page has cyclomatic complexity 19 (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 · CreateCommand · ×2

CreateCommand::spawn_background_node (cyclomatic 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/authority/create.rs:134 — CreateCommand::spawn_background_node has cyclomatic complexity 16 (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.
CreateCommand::run (cyclomatic 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:190 — CreateCommand::run 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 · ×2

HackComment implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/test/ockam/secure_channel_test.exs:277 — # Hacky way to get the receiver' pid, so we can monitor it and ensure it get terminated — 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.
HackComment implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/tests/common/common.rs:37 — // Hack to create Authority Identity using the same vault and storage — 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 · ockam_command · ×2

ockam_command::markdown::generate_markdown_page (cognitive 35) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/markdown/mod.rs:132 — ockam_command::markdown::generate_markdown_page has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (27 pts), loops 3 (8 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.
ockam_command::node::util::spawn_node (cognitive 26) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/util.rs:57 — ockam_command::node::util::spawn_node has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 25, loops 1. 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 · ZoneConfig · ×2

ZoneConfig::transform_env_vars (cognitive 34) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/zone_config.rs:233 — ZoneConfig::transform_env_vars has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (17 pts), loops 4 (13 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 25). 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.
ZoneConfig::validate (cognitive 19) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/zone_config.rs:131 — ZoneConfig::validate has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 5 (7 pts) (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 · ockam_node · ×2

ockam_node::debugger::generate_graphs (cognitive 32) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/debugger.rs:170 — ockam_node::debugger::generate_graphs has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 11 (29 pts), match/switch 2, if/else 1 (nesting depth added 18). 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.
ockam_node::storage::database::database_configuration::parse_connection_string (cognitive 17) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/storage/database/database_configuration.rs:431 — ockam_node::storage::database::database_configuration::parse_connection_string has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 4 (10 pts), if/else 4 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 9). 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 · ConnectionBuilder · ×2

ConnectionBuilder::instantiate (cognitive 28) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/connection/mod.rs:250 — ConnectionBuilder::instantiate has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (26 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 20). 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.
ConnectionBuilder::recalculate_transport_route (cognitive 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/connection/mod.rs:323 — ConnectionBuilder::recalculate_transport_route has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). 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 · DevCommand · ×2

DevCommand::run_containers (cognitive 25) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:647 — DevCommand::run_containers has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), loops 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 1 (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.
DevCommand::add_container_env_vars (cognitive 19) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:850 — DevCommand::add_container_env_vars has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts) (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 · InletInterceptorImpl · ×2

InletInterceptorImpl::handle_produce_request (cognitive 22) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/kafka/protocol_aware/inlet/request.rs:193 — InletInterceptorImpl::handle_produce_request has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (15 pts), loops 3 (7 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.
InletInterceptorImpl::handle_fetch_response (cognitive 22) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/kafka/protocol_aware/inlet/response.rs:273 — InletInterceptorImpl::handle_fetch_response has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (15 pts), loops 3 (7 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.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

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

Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:273 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:273-295 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:381-403 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 97 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 (23 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/puncture/negotiation/message.rs:24 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/puncture/negotiation/message.rs:24-46 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/puncture/rendezvous_service/messages.rs:15-45 — 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 (22 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (22 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/entrypoint.rs:188 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/entrypoint.rs:188-209 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/frontend.rs:393-414 — 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 (22 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/manager.rs:98 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/manager.rs:98-119 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/manager.rs:124-145 — 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 (21 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/consumer/create.rs:44 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/consumer/create.rs:44-64 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/producer/create.rs:44-64 — 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 (21 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:125 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:125-145 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs:125-145 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 103 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 (20 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:132 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:132-151 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs:140-159 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 54 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 (20 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/workers/sender.rs:66 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/workers/sender.rs:66-85 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/workers/sender.rs:111-130 — 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 (13–15 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (13–15 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:83 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:83-95 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:267-281 — 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 (13–15 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:125 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:125-137 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:322-336 — 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 (8 lines × 4) · ×2

Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/listener/list.rs:53 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/listener/list.rs:53-60 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/service/list.rs:41-48 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/listener/list.rs:47-54 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/worker/list.rs:50-57 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 4 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 4 times.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/identities_repository_sql.rs:217 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/identities_repository_sql.rs:217-224 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/identities_repository_sql.rs:233-240 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/nodes_repository_sql.rs:123-130 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:44-51 — there are 4 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:260 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:260-265 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:356-361 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs:163-168 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 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 (6 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/routing/message/transport_message.rs:145 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_core/src/routing/message/transport_message.rs:145-150 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/transport_message.rs:47-52 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/messages/routing_message.rs:56-61 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.

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

Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/inlet.rs:26 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/inlet.rs:26-49 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/outlet.rs:25-48 — 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 (24 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/ordering.ex:12 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/ordering.ex:12-35 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/ordering.ex:54-77 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) · ×2

Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/delete.rs:61 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/delete.rs:61-71 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/outlet/delete.rs:58-68 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/connection/delete.rs:61-71 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/delete.rs:67-77 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/outlet/delete.rs:72-82 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 5 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 5 times.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/accept.rs:49 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/accept.rs:49-59 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs:68-79 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/list.rs:49-59 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/service.rs:79-90 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/show.rs:51-61 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/create.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/share/service.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 47 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 (8 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/identities_repository_sql.rs:217 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/identities_repository_sql.rs:217-224 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/identities_repository_sql.rs:233-240 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/nodes_repository_sql.rs:123-130 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:403 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:403-410 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:235-242 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/users_repository_sql.rs:151-158 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 · NodeConfig · ×1

NodeConfig::merge (cyclomatic 26) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/config.rs:161 — NodeConfig::merge has cyclomatic complexity 26 (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 · Node · ×1

Node::args (cyclomatic 24) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/node.rs:54 — Node::args has cyclomatic complexity 24 (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 · ReplCommand · ×1

ReplCommand::open_repl (cyclomatic 23) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/repl.rs:59 — ReplCommand::open_repl has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). Of this number, 21 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 · RequestState · ×1

RequestState::process_http_buffer (cyclomatic 18) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/http/state.rs:26 — RequestState::process_http_buffer 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 · DeleteCommandTui · ×1

DeleteCommandTui::delete (cyclomatic 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/terminal/tui.rs:177 — DeleteCommandTui::delete 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DirectoryWatcher · ×1

DirectoryWatcher::_run (cognitive 47) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/watcher.rs:75 — DirectoryWatcher::_run has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (36 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ReplCommand · ×1

ReplCommand::open_repl (cognitive 42) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/repl.rs:59 — ReplCommand::open_repl has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (28 pts), match/switch 5 (10 pts), loops 3 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 22). Of this number, 39 points are the body's own statements and 3 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 · InletCommand · ×1

InletCommand::parse_args (cognitive 40) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs:197 — InletCommand::parse_args has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (31 pts), loops 2 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 27). 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 · Abac · ×1

Abac::is_authorized_static (cognitive 35) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/abac/abac.rs:143 — Abac::is_authorized_static has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (17 pts), match/switch 4 (14 pts), loops 1 (4 pts) (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DeleteNodeCommand · ×1

DeleteNodeCommand::run (cognitive 33) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/project_member/delete.rs:71 — DeleteNodeCommand::run has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (24 pts), loops 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 1 (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 · KafkaKeyExchangeControllerImpl · ×1

KafkaKeyExchangeControllerImpl::get_or_create_secure_channel (cognitive 30) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/kafka/key_exchange/secure_channels.rs:58 — KafkaKeyExchangeControllerImpl::get_or_create_secure_channel has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (27 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 18). 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 · StatusData · ×1

StatusData::fmt (cognitive 30) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/status/mod.rs:181 — StatusData::fmt has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (22 pts), loops 4 (8 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Node · ×1

Node::args (cognitive 29) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/run/parser/resource/node.rs:54 — Node::args has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 23 (29 pts) (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RelayService · ×1

RelayService::handle_message (cognitive 27) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam/src/relay_service/relay_service.rs:67 — RelayService::handle_message has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (22 pts), match/switch 1 (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RequestState · ×1

RequestState::process_http_buffer (cognitive 27) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/http/state.rs:26 — RequestState::process_http_buffer has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), match/switch 3 (8 pts), loops 1 (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Migrator · ×1

Migrator::run_migrations_impl (cognitive 27) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/storage/database/migrations/migration_support/migrator.rs:121 — Migrator::run_migrations_impl has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (15 pts), if/else 6 (8 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 14). 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 · NodeConfig · ×1

NodeConfig::merge (cognitive 26) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/node/create/config.rs:161 — NodeConfig::merge has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 22 (23 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 1). 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 · DeleteCommand · ×1

DeleteCommand::print_output (cognitive 25) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/delete.rs:46 — DeleteCommand::print_output has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (19 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 13). 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 · Command · ×1

Command::run_with_retry (cognitive 24) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/subcommand.rs:400 — Command::run_with_retry has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 4 (14 pts), if/else 3 (8 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 16). 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 · DeleteCommandTui · ×1

DeleteCommandTui::delete (cognitive 24) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/terminal/tui.rs:177 — DeleteCommandTui::delete has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (19 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OutletCommand · ×1

OutletCommand::parse_args (cognitive 24) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs:205 — OutletCommand::parse_args has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (20 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · SqlxDatabase · ×1

SqlxDatabase::create_impl (cognitive 23) REDACTED:154 — SqlxDatabase::create_impl has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), match/switch 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 2 (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 · DevNodeCommand · ×1

DevNodeCommand::run (cognitive 22) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:117 — DevNodeCommand::run has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 5 (13 pts), if/else 8 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 9). 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 · HandshakeWorker · ×1

HandshakeWorker::create (cognitive 22) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channel/handshake/handshake_worker.rs:136 — HandshakeWorker::create has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (13 pts), match/switch 2 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 10). 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · NodeResources · ×1

NodeResources::fmt (cognitive 21) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/models/node.rs:146 — NodeResources::fmt has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10, loops 5 (10 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 5). 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 · EnrollHandler · ×1

EnrollHandler::get_user_space (cognitive 21) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/enroll/handler.rs:397 — EnrollHandler::get_user_space has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), match/switch 2 (3 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TcpPortalWorker · ×1

TcpPortalWorker::handle_message (cognitive 21) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/portal_worker.rs:613 — TcpPortalWorker::handle_message has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (16 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (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 · TokioRuntimeWatchdog · ×1

TokioRuntimeWatchdog::watchdog_loop (cognitive 20) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/watchdog.rs:33 — TokioRuntimeWatchdog::watchdog_loop has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (10 pts), loops 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 1 (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 · ShowCommandTui · ×1

ShowCommandTui::show (cognitive 19) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/terminal/tui.rs:26 — ShowCommandTui::show has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 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 · OckamLogFormat · ×1

OckamLogFormat::format_event (cognitive 18) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/logs/logging_options.rs:102 — OckamLogFormat::format_event has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), 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 · Session · ×1

Session::run_loop (cognitive 18) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/session/session.rs:439 — Session::run_loop has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 3 (8 pts), if/else 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (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 · BleAdapter · ×1

BleAdapter::connect (cognitive 17) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/btleplug/mod.rs:104 — BleAdapter::connect has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 4). 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 · PeerPendingRoutingMessageStorage · ×1

PeerPendingRoutingMessageStorage::add_transport_message_and_try_assemble (cognitive 17) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/workers/pending_messages/peer_pending_routing_message_storage.rs:39 — PeerPendingRoutingMessageStorage::add_transport_message_and_try_assemble has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 4 (7 pts), if/else 4 (5 pts), loops 2 (5 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 · Brand · ×1

Brand::fmt (cognitive 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/bin/brand.rs:228 — Brand::fmt has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7, loops 2 (6 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 6). 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 · DeployCommand · ×1

DeployCommand::build_local_image (cognitive 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/deploy.rs:307 — DeployCommand::build_local_image has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (8 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), match/switch 1 (3 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 · InitCommand · ×1

InitCommand::create_target_path (cognitive 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/init.rs:97 — InitCommand::create_target_path has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (15 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 4). 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 · PendingMessage · ×1

PendingMessage::add_transport_message (cognitive 16) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_udp/src/workers/pending_messages/pending_message.rs:78 — PendingMessage::add_transport_message has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (16 pts) (nesting depth added 3). 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Channel.handle_inner_message_impl (cognitive 16) · ×1

Channel.handle_inner_message_impl (cognitive 16) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/secure_channel/channel.ex:539 — Channel.handle_inner_message_impl has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (10 pts), match/switch 3 (6 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.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate functionality for creating relays. `Node` has `create_relay` and `create_static_relay`, while the `RemoteRelay` type also exposes `create` and `create_static` with nearly identical signatures (except `RemoteRelay` takes `Context` explicitly). This creates confusion about whether to use the Node method or the RemoteRelay static method. · ×1

Duplicate functionality for creating relays. `Node` has `create_relay` and `create_static_relay`, while the `RemoteRelay` type also exposes `create` and `create_static` with nearly identical signatures (except `RemoteRelay` takes `Context` explicitly). This creates confusion about whether to use the Node method or the RemoteRelay static method. — Remove `create_relay` and `create_static_relay` from `Node`. Direct users to use `RemoteRelay::create` and `RemoteRelay::create_static` instead, or remove `RemoteRelay` methods if `Node` is intended to be the sole entry point. (signatures: Node.create_relay(orchestrator_route: impl Into<Route>, options: RemoteRelayOptions): Result | Node.create_static_relay(orchestrator_route: impl Into<Route>, alias: impl Into<String>, options: RemoteRelayOptions): Result | RemoteRelay.create(ctx: Context, orchestrator_route: impl Into<Route>, options: RemoteRelayOptions): Result | RemoteRelay.create_static(ctx: Context, orchestrator_route: impl Into<Route>, alias: impl Into<String>, options: RemoteRelayOptions): Result)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming and parameter handling for message sending. `send` takes a generic `route · ×1

Inconsistent naming and parameter handling for message sending. `send` takes a generic `route: R` while others take `impl Into<Route>`. `send` and `send_extended` do not return a response, while `send_and_receive` and `send_and_receive_extended` do. The naming convention switches between `send` and `send_and_receive` without a clear parallel structure for the 'extended' variants (e.g., is there a `send_extended` that returns? No, but `send_and_receive_extended` exists). — Standardize the first parameter to `impl Into<Route>` across all methods. Consider renaming `send` to `send_one_way` or ensuring `send` and `send_extended` have consistent return types or clear naming distinctions (e.g., `send` vs `send_with_options`). Ensure the 'extended' variants are clearly the options-bearing counterparts to the base variants. (signatures: Node.send(route: R, msg: M): Result | Node.send_and_receive(route: impl Into<Route>, msg: impl Message): Result | Node.send_extended(route: impl Into<Route>, msg: impl Message, options: MessageSendOptions): Result | Node.send_and_receive_extended(route: impl Into<Route>, msg: impl Message, options: MessageSendReceiveOptions): Result)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Confusingly similar methods for retrieving identity information. `get_named_identity` vs `get_named_identity_or_default` vs `get_identity_by_optional_name` vs `get_identifier_by_optional_name`. It is unclear when to use 'optional' vs 'default' vs direct lookup, and whether the return type is the full Identity, just the Identifier, or a NamedIdentity struct. · ×1

Confusingly similar methods for retrieving identity information. `get_named_identity` vs `get_named_identity_or_default` vs `get_identity_by_optional_name` vs `get_identifier_by_optional_name`. It is unclear when to use 'optional' vs 'default' vs direct lookup, and whether the return type is the full Identity, just the Identifier, or a NamedIdentity struct. — Clarify the distinction between `get_named_identity` (by name string) and `get_named_identity_by_identifier` (by Identifier object). (signatures: CliState.get_named_identity(name: str): Result | CliState.get_named_identity_or_default(name: String): Result | CliState.get_identity_by_optional_name(name: str): Result | CliState.get_identifier_by_optional_name(name: str): Result)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent method naming for identity creation. `create_identity_with_name_and_vault` vs `create_identity_with_name` vs `create_identity_with_key_id`. The parameters are not consistently ordered or named, and the distinction between 'with_name' and 'with_name_and_vault' is unclear (does 'with_name' use a default vault?). · ×1

Inconsistent method naming for identity creation. `create_identity_with_name_and_vault` vs `create_identity_with_name` vs `create_identity_with_key_id`. The parameters are not consistently ordered or named, and the distinction between 'with_name' and 'with_name_and_vault' is unclear (does 'with_name' use a default vault?). — Standardize identity creation methods. Use a builder pattern or consistent parameter ordering. For example, `create_identity(name, vault_name)` and `create_identity_with_key(name, vault_name, key_id)`. Ensure the 'default' behavior is explicit or removed in favor of explicit vault specification. (signatures: CliState.create_identity_with_name_and_vault(name: str, vault_name: str): Result | CliState.create_identity_with_name(name: str): Result | CliState.create_identity_with_key_id(name: str, vault_name: str, key_id: str): Result)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming pattern for space retrieval compared to identity retrieval. `get_space_by_name` vs `get_space_by_name_or_default` vs `get_default_space`. While similar to the identity issue, the presence of `get_default_space` as a separate method without a name argument is inconsistent with `get_named_identity_or_default` which takes a name. · ×1

Inconsistent naming pattern for space retrieval compared to identity retrieval. `get_space_by_name` vs `get_space_by_name_or_default` vs `get_default_space`. While similar to the identity issue, the presence of `get_default_space` as a separate method without a name argument is inconsistent with `get_named_identity_or_default` which takes a name. — Align with the identity retrieval pattern: `get_space(name)` and `get_space_or_default(name)`. Remove `get_default_space` if it can be replaced by `get_space_or_default(None)` or similar, or ensure the naming convention is consistent across all resource types (Identity, Space, Project). (signatures: CliState.get_space_by_name(name: str): Result | CliState.get_space_by_name_or_default(name: String): Result | CliState.get_default_space(): Result)

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 family (3 members, 8 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member family (3 members, 8 shared lines) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:313 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:313-326 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:330-345 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:349-366 — These 3 members are variants of one another: a block of 8 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 3 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 3 times.

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

Near-duplicate member pair (49 shared lines) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:168 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/influxdb/inlet/create.rs:168-268 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/create.rs:190-342 — 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 · Near-duplicate member pair (28 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member pair (28 shared lines) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:402 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:402-449 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:234-274 — These two members are variants of one another: 28 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 · Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) · ×1

Edited copy of a member (17 corresponding lines) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:91 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:91-109 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:113-129 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 17 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) · ×1

Edited copy of a member (18 corresponding lines) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/multiaddr_resolver/local_resolver.rs:11 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/multiaddr_resolver/local_resolver.rs:11-60 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/multiaddr_resolver/transport_route_resolver.rs:41-117 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 18 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) · ×1

Edited copy of a member (22 corresponding lines) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/entrypoint.rs:182 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/backend/entrypoint.rs:182-222 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/control_api/frontend.rs:392-428 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 22 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) · ×1

Edited copy of a member (15 corresponding lines) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:53 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:53-67 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:71-87 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 15 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (12 members, 50+ identical tokens) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:31 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:31-69 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:75-110 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:117-160 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:168-200 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:209-250 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:257-301 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:309-344 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:353-405 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:417-460 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:467-504 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:510-543 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:549-589 — These 12 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 12 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 12 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (9 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:83 — REDACTED:83-107 | REDACTED:113-138 | REDACTED:144-168 | REDACTED:174-197 | REDACTED:203-227 | REDACTED:233-256 | REDACTED:298-321 | REDACTED:327-350 | REDACTED:356-377 — These 9 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 9 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 9 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (42 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (42 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:203 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs:203-244 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs:194-235 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/compat/mutex.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/driver/mutex.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 103 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 (40 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (40 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:275 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/expr.rs:275-314 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node/src/storage/database/migrations/node_migrations/rust/sqlite/migration_20240111100002_delete_trust_context.rs:132-171 — 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 (32 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (32 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:243 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:243-274 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:339-370 — 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 (26–27 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (26–27 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:215 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:215-241 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:312-337 — 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 (24–25 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (24–25 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:328 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs:328-351 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs:133-157 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/dev.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/logs.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 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 (22–24 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (22–24 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/router/mod.rs:69 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/router/mod.rs:69-90 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/router/mod.rs:216-239 — 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 (15–18 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (15–18 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/portal.rs:245 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/influxdb/portal.rs:245-259 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/service/kafka_services.rs:298-315 — 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 (17 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (17 lines × 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/router/mod.rs:172 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_ble/src/router/mod.rs:172-188 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/router/mod.rs:105-121 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/workers/sender.rs:61-77 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_websocket/src/workers/sender.rs:106-122 — there are 4 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

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

Duplicated block (15 lines × 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:43 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:43-57 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:229-243 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:377-391 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:434-448 — 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 (13–15 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (13–15 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:477 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:477-491 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:518-530 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:557-569 — 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 (14 lines × 12) · ×1

Duplicated block (14 lines × 12) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:48 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:48-61 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:87-100 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:129-142 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:184-197 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:234-247 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:273-286 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:328-341 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:382-395 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:439-452 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:483-496 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:522-535 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/ai_platform/node_service_client.rs:561-574 — all 12 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 (13 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 4) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/credential_issuer/credential_issuer_worker.rs:55 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/credential_issuer/credential_issuer_worker.rs:55-67 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:46-58 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:35-47 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs:47-59 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.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. 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 (11–12 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–12 lines × 2) REDACTED:96 — REDACTED:96-107 | REDACTED:340-350 — 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 (7–11 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7–11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/project/project.rs:62 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/project/project.rs:62-72 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/project/project.rs:93-99 — 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 (9–11 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9–11 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/output/mod.rs:80 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/output/mod.rs:80-88 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/output/mod.rs:146-156 — 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 (8–10 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:110 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:110-117 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs:79-88 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.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. 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 (8–9 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/listener/list.rs:54 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/secure_channel/listener/list.rs:54-62 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/service/list.rs:42-49 — 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 (5–7 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (5–7 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:131 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs:131-135 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:64-69 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs:85-91 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator_worker.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.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. 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 (30 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (30 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/models/transport/request.rs:15 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/nodes/models/transport/request.rs:15-83 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/share/accept.rs:15-44 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/orchestrator/share/list.rs:15-54 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.

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

Duplicated block (29 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/purpose_key/credential/purpose_key.rs:22 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/purpose_key/credential/purpose_key.rs:22-50 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/purpose_key/secure_channel/purpose_key.rs:22-50 — 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 (7 lines × 5) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:33 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs:33-39 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_repository_sql.rs:35-41 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs:37-43 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/identities/storage/credential_repository_sql.rs:37-43 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/identities/storage/identity_attributes_repository_sql.rs:38-44 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_policy_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_abac/src/policy/storage/resource_type_policy_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (7 lines × 15) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 15) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/storage/authority_enrollment_token_repository_sql.rs:33 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/storage/authority_enrollment_token_repository_sql.rs:33-39 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/storage/authority_members_repository_sql.rs:28-34 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/enrollments_repository_sql.rs:29-35 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/identities_repository_sql.rs:27-33 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/journeys_repository_sql.rs:26-32 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/nodes_repository_sql.rs:30-36 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs:45-51 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs:27-33 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/tcp_portals_repository_sql.rs:34-40 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/users_repository_sql.rs:27-33 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/vaults_repository_sql.rs:24-30 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/identities/storage/change_history_repository_sql.rs:33-39 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/purpose_keys/storage/purpose_keys_repository_sql.rs:35-41 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity/src/secure_channels/storage/secure_channel_repository_sql.rs:32-38 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_vault/src/storage/secrets_repository_sql.rs:37-43 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/projects_repository_sql.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/cli_state/storage/spaces_repository_sql.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 69 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 (8 lines × 5) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 5) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/show.rs:74 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/cluster/show.rs:74-81 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/create.rs:70-77 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/delete.rs:76-83 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/list.rs:89-96 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/secret.rs:99-106 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 5 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 5 times.

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

Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator.rs:151 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator.rs:151-161 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/direct/direct_authenticator.rs:192-202 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer.rs:62-75 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

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

Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/list.rs:38 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/inlet/list.rs:38-49 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/kafka/outlet/list.rs:36-47 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/tcp/inlet/list.rs:41-52 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 7) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 7) REDACTED:117 — REDACTED:117-124 | REDACTED:148-155 | REDACTED:207-214 | REDACTED:237-246 | REDACTED:304-311 | REDACTED:333-340 | REDACTED:361-368 — all 7 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 (9 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:49 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs:49-57 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs:61-69 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/okta/mod.rs:72-80 — before extracting anything, compare `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/acceptor_worker.rs` and `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/authenticator/enrollment_tokens/issuer_worker.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 37 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 (16–17 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/request/parser.ex:59 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/request/parser.ex:59-75 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/request/parser.ex:83-98 — 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 (10–11 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:254 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:254-264 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:275-284 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:296-305 — 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 (3–10 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (3–10 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:38 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:38-47 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:55-63 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:72-74 — 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 (8–9 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:316 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:316-324 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:334-341 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/lib/interceptor/protocol/metadata/response/parser.ex:354-361 — 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 (33–34 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (33–34 lines × 2) implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/test_utils/mod.rs:407 — implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/test_utils/mod.rs:407-440 | implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/test_utils/mod.rs:462-494 — 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 (25 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (25 lines × 2) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/reliable_deduplication.ex:74 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/reliable_deduplication.ex:74-98 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/messaging/reliable_deduplication.ex:110-134 — 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 (13 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/session/count_to.ex:35 — implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/session/count_to.ex:35-47 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/session/routing.ex:59-71 | implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/lib/ockam/examples/session/routing.ex:76-88 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

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

End-of-life runtime: Rust 1.86 — rust-toolchain.toml declares Rust 1.86 as this project's toolchain file, and Rust 1.86, superseded by 1.87 on 2025-05-15 (the Rust project patches only the current stable). An unsupported runtime receives no security patches, so every vulnerability disclosed in it since 2025-05-15 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 ockam (Cargo) · ×1

Unstable project ockam (Cargo) — ockam (Cargo) has instability 0.82 with 2 dependents.

D5 · Coupling · Unstable project ockam_api · ×1

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

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1

Off the main sequence: ockam_core — ockam_core: abstractness 0.13, instability 0.06, distance 0.81 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 17 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

Minor — 33 finding(s)

D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×7

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Low vulnerability · ×4

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Most significant orphaned file · ×3

Most significant orphaned file implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_transport_tcp/src/portal/interceptor.rs — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_multiaddr/src/lib.rs — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
Most significant orphaned file implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api/src/session/session.rs — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Stale vulnerability suppression · ×2

REDACTED
REDACTED

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

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 11 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/init.rs, implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/outlet.rs, implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/common_args.rs, implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/secret.rs, implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/inlet.rs, implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/attach.rs, implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/base_command.rs, implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command/src/zone/delete.rs (+3 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.

D16 · Bus Factor · Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1

Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 3 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (14 single-owned of 699 analysed files in total, 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; 699 of the 1281 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #2 (1 file(s)), anonymized user #3 (1 file(s)), anonymized user #4 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above.

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

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

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api · ×1

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_api — A huge API whose namespaces are all unrelated features like nodes/models, orchestrator, control-api, logs, and CLI storage. Suggested: split into focused API sub-projects for each of the 41 namespaces

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command · ×1

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_command — A sprawling command-line tool whose namespaces cover zone, node, run/parser, project, vault, and credential subsystems. Suggested: split into cohesive command sub-projects for each of the 58 namespaces

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity · ×1

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_identity — A grab-bag identity project whose namespaces are unrelated security modules like secure_channels, identities, credentials, and access control. Suggested: split into focused identity sub-projects for each of the 20 namespaces

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node · ×1

Split implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_node — A sprawling node project whose namespaces are all storage/database/migrations and workers. Suggested: split into focused node sub-projects for each of the 13 namespaces

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

REDACTED

D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Dormant codebase · ×1

Dormant codebase — 564 of 699 significant files have no living knowledge — the codebase as a whole is dormant, not 564 separate risks. Counted over 699 of the 1281 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over. Re-engage owners or document before change.

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

M1 · Documentation (README) · Thin README · ×1

Thin README — The root README is 35 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.

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 23/24 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `implementations/rust/ockam/ockam_macros`.

Minor — 38 finding(s)

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×38

Outdated: cbor — `:cbor` is locked at 1.0.1 but 1.0.2 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.0.0"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update cbor` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: cbor — `:cbor` is locked at 1.0.1 but 1.0.2 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.0.0"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_typed_cbor/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update cbor` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_healthcheck/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_metrics/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_typed_cbor/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_cloud_node/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_rust_elixir_nifs/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_abac/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: credo — `:credo` is locked at 1.7.12 but 1.7.19 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.6"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update credo` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_abac/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_cloud_node/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_services/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_typed_cbor/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_healthcheck/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_metrics/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: dialyxir — `:dialyxir` is locked at 1.4.5 but 1.4.8 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 1.1"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update dialyxir` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ex_doc — `:ex_doc` is locked at 0.38.2 but 0.40.4 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 0.25"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_metrics/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update ex_doc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ex_doc — `:ex_doc` is locked at 0.38.2 but 0.40.4 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 0.25"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update ex_doc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ex_doc — `:ex_doc` is locked at 0.38.2 but 0.40.4 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 0.25"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_kafka/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update ex_doc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ex_doc — `:ex_doc` is locked at 0.38.2 but 0.40.4 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 0.25"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_typed_cbor/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update ex_doc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ex_doc — `:ex_doc` is locked at 0.38.2 but 0.40.4 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 0.25"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_abac/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update ex_doc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
Outdated: ex_doc — `:ex_doc` is locked at 0.38.2 but 0.40.4 is the current stable release on hex.pm, and it already satisfies the `"~> 0.25"` requirement declared in implementations/elixir/ockam/ockam_healthcheck/mix.exs — so the lockfile is behind this repository's own declared range. Run `mix deps.update ex_doc` and commit the updated REDACTED.
+ 13 more in this group — see findings.md.

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-eb645afcb8d14460aec2a065f2e66f89/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	8	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-eb645afcb8d14460aec2a065f2e66f89/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 .	35	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive .	49	artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	24	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 01a0f17a-d160-7e11-bc3f-0e1d0db55690 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Build-Trust/ockam

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 · 86% · Strong ·

At a glance — Architecture · 94% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 53% · Adequate · gated by D34, M2 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 85% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Security · 42% · Weak · gated by D29, D30, D36 ·

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 91% · Exemplary ·

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