Smart hostel management with distributed DDD, WIP
Public report — Hostel, published 19 Jun 2026. Concrete security findings (CVE IDs, secret matches, dependency versions) are hidden in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Watchdog 19-06-2026 @ 22:05 UTC Public
Code Health Audit

Eaba/Hostel

33% Provisional

Small · 10,904 LoC · 55 projects · rebuild ~0.1 person-years · weakest lens: Readiness (16%)

Build did not compile — scores are provisional
The analysed solution did not compile (3 build error(s)). Dimensions that depend on the compiler — complexity, duplication, cohesion, dead code, API surface — ran on incomplete models, so the scores below are provisional. Fix the build, then re-run for a reliable grade. First errors: MSB4278: The imported file "$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)/Microsoft/VisualStudio/v$(VisualStudioVersion)/SSDT/Microsoft.Data.Tools.Schema.SqlTasks.targets" does not exist and appears to be part of a Visual Studio component. This file may require MSBuild.exe in order to be imported successfully, and so may fail to build in the dotnet CLI.; CS0103: The name 'WebHost' does not exist in the current context

Grounded in facts. Every number here is computed, not narrated — reproducible, tool-backed, and traceable to a line of code. How to trust this ▸

67/70dimensions tool-verifieddeterministic · confidence 1.0 · 3 LLM-assisted, advisory
221findings with an exact file:lineof 283 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
70/105dimensions across the health lenses10904 LoC · 55 projects — wide & deep

Executive summary

Read through the Production lens — the standard calibration. *Green* means good enough to run in production. The score is absolute and comparable across repos.

eaba/Hostel carries serious risk (33%). Several issues below can materially affect reliability, security, or the cost of change and warrant near-term attention.

It is strongest in Event-Driven (100%) — its messaging keeps components properly decoupled. Architecture (75%) is solid too.

Most urgent: a critical security exposure was detected (see the Security & Compliance lens). Treat it as a priority regardless of the overall grade.

The area that most needs attention is Readiness (16%) — operating, monitoring and recovering the system safely is harder. Code Health (42%) is the next concern — changes there are slower and more error-prone.

Leadership focus, highest impact first: Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection /… (Data Protection); Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions… (Architecture documentation); Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately (Folder & project structure).

For scale: Small (~10,904 production lines); rebuilding it from scratch would take roughly ~0.1 person-years (~1 engineer). Approximate, ±~30%.

It builds on a genuinely strong Event-Driven foundation (100%); the priorities above are the highest-leverage way to bring the rest up to that level.

Code composition — where the lines go
Business logic 19%Plumbing 64%Generated 17%
New since the last scan (50+)

50 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-06-19) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

  • D4 · Duplicated block (82 lines × 2) Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Startup.cs
  • D4 · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) Hosts/Hostel.Host/Startup.cs
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Shared Shared/Shared.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Command Domain/Commands/Owner.Command/Owner.Command.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Command Domain/Commands/Tenant.Command/Tenant.Command.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Command Domain/Commands/Hostel.Command/Hostel.Command.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Command Domain/Commands/Reminder.Command/Reminder.Command.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Command Domain/Commands/Notifier.Command/Notifier.Command.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Event Domain/Events/Owner.Event/Owner.Event.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Event Domain/Events/Hostel.Event/Hostel.Event.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Event Domain/Events/Reminder.Event/Reminder.Event.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Event Domain/Events/Notifier.Event/Notifier.Event.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Event Domain/Events/Tenant.Event/Tenant.Event.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Entity Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Hostel.Entity.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Entity Domain/Entities/Reminder.Entity/Reminder.Entity.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Entity Domain/Entities/Notifier.Entity/Notifier.Entity.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Entity Domain/Entities/Tenant.Entity/Tenant.Entity.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Model Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Hostel.Model.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Model Domain/Models/Reminder.Model/Reminder.Model.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Model Domain/Models/Notifier.Model/Notifier.Model.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Model Domain/Models/Owner.Model/Owner.Model.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Model Domain/Models/Tenant.Model/Tenant.Model.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Query Domain/Queries/Hostel.Query/Hostel.Query.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Query Domain/Queries/Reminder.Query/Reminder.Query.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Query Domain/Queries/Notifier.Query/Notifier.Query.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Query Domain/Queries/Owner.Query/Owner.Query.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Query Domain/Queries/Tenant.Query/Tenant.Query.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Host Hosts/Hostel.Host/Hostel.Host.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.State Domain/States/Hostel.State/Hostel.State.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.State Domain/States/Notifier.State/Notifier.State.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.State Domain/States/Owner.State/Owner.State.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.State Domain/States/Reminder.State/Reminder.State.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Repository Domain/Repositories/Hostel.Repository/Hostel.Repository.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Repository Domain/Repositories/Notifier.Repository/Notifier.Repository.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Repository Domain/Repositories/Owner.Repository/Owner.Repository.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Repository Domain/Repositories/Reminder.Repository/Reminder.Repository.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Repository Domain/Repositories/Tenant.Repository/Tenant.Repository.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Akka.MassTransit.Logger Logger/AkkaDotNet.MassTransit.Logger/Akka.MassTransit.Logger.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: MassTransit.Command Domain/Commands/MassTransit.Command/MassTransit.Command.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: MassTransit.Event Domain/Events/MassTransit.Event/MassTransit.Event.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console Logger/Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console/Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: LogShared LogShared/LogShared.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Akka.Extension Extensions/Akka.Extension/Akka.Extension.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC/Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: SignalR.Host Hosts/SignalR.Host/SignalR.Host.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: SharpNetSH SharpNetSH/SharpNetSH.csproj
  • D19 · Low XML-doc coverage: IdentityServer.Host Hosts/IdentityServer.Host/IdentityServer.Host.csproj
  • R7 · Dead file (~35 LoC) Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/src/app/_services/home.service.ts
  • R7 · Dead file (~20 LoC) Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/test.ts

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 — €5,400–€27,000
Cost to rebuild€5,400–€27,000 (0.1–0.2 person-years (90–284 h), ~1 engineer)
Domain complexityVery high — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor0.7× (at 33% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shapeSmall · 43% boilerplate · 34% straight-line · 23% branching logic
Dead frontend code~391 LoC unreachable (16 file(s)) — that slice of this estimate buys code with zero runtime value; deleting it is the cheapest win in this report (the R7 card lists every file)

This codebase represents roughly ~0.1 person-years of build effort (about ~€16,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Readiness at 16% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Very high (×1.8) — microservices, CQRS, event-driven integration × a 0.7× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30%. 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.

1
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
+3.6 pts · Medium effort · Data Protection
2
Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.
+2.9 pts · Medium effort · Architecture documentation
3
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
+1.7 pts · Medium effort · Folder & project structure

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Highest-leverage move: fix the build · Critical · Leverage
The solution doesn't compile, so every Roslyn-derived dimension (complexity, duplication, cohesion, dead code, API surface) ran on incomplete models and is PROVISIONAL. Fixing the build is the single change that makes the rest of the report trustworthy — do it first. The compiler reported: MSB4278: The imported file "$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)/Microsoft/VisualStudio/v$(VisualStudioVersion)/SSDT/Microsoft.Data.Tools.Schema.SqlTasks.targets" does not exist and appears to be part of a Visual Studio component. This file may require MSBuild.exe in order to be imported successfully, and so may fail to build in the dotnet CLI.; CS0103: The name 'WebHost' does not exist in the current context.
Evidence: D18 build: The compiler reported: MSB4278: The imported file "$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)/Microsoft/VisualStudio/v$(VisualStudioVersion)/SSDT/Microsoft.Data.Tools.Schema.SqlTasks.targets" does not exist and appears to be part of a Visual Studio component. This file may require MSBuild.exe in order to be imported successfully, and so may fail to build in the dotnet CLI.; CS0103: The name 'WebHost' does not exist in the current context.
→ Fix the build, then re-run for a reliable grade.
Value concentrated against a weak lens · High · Value at risk
This is a Small asset (~0.1 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Readiness at 16%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.
Evidence: valuation: Small, ~0.1 person-years rebuild (10,904 LoC) · weakest lens: Readiness 16%
→ Direct remediation budget at Readiness first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.

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.

arch Akka.Extension Extension Akka.MassTransit.Logger Logger Akka.MassTransit.Logger->Akka.Extension LogShared LogShared Akka.MassTransit.Logger->LogShared Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console Console Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console->LogShared Hostel.Command Command Hostel.Model Model Hostel.Command->Hostel.Model Hostel.State State Hostel.Command->Hostel.State Shared Shared Hostel.Command->Shared Hostel.Entity Entity Hostel.Entity->Akka.Extension Hostel.Entity->Hostel.Command Hostel.Repository Repository Hostel.Entity->Hostel.Repository Hostel.Entity->Hostel.State MassTransit.Event Event Hostel.Entity->MassTransit.Event Hostel.Entity->Shared Hostel.Event Event Hostel.Event->Hostel.Model Hostel.Event->Shared Hostel.Host Host Hostel.Host->Akka.Extension Hostel.Host->Akka.MassTransit.Logger Hostel.Host->Hostel.Entity Hostel.Query Query Hostel.Repository->Hostel.Command Hostel.Repository->Shared Hostel.State->Hostel.Event Hostel.State->Shared Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC MVC MassTransit.Command Command Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC->MassTransit.Command Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC->Shared Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC MVC Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC->Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC IdentityServer.Host Host IdentityServer.Host->Akka.Extension IdentityServer.Host->Akka.MassTransit.Logger IdentityServer.Host->MassTransit.Command IdentityServer.Host->MassTransit.Event IdentityServer.Host->Shared MassTransit.Command->Shared MassTransit.Event->Hostel.Event MassTransit.Event->Shared Sensor.Event Event Sensor.Event->Shared SignalR.Host Host SignalR.Host->MassTransit.Event SignalR.Host->Shared __more__ +36 more projects

At a glance — Code Health · 42% · Poor · gated by D18, R10, R7

At a glance — Architecture · 75% · Healthy

At a glance — Maturity · 43% · Poor · gated by M2

At a glance — Readiness · 16% · Critical · gated by D8, D9, R8, P1, P3, P7

At a glance — Security · 57% · Fair · gated by D33, C1

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

At a glance — Accessibility · 50% · Poor · gated by AC1

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 categoryFindingsSeverity
A06:2021 — Vulnerable & Outdated Components50High / Critical

Roadmap

First, encrypt sensitive data at rest and manage keys in a vault, or confirm this is handled by infrastructure. Next, begin logging significant architectural decisions in an ADR log to record rationale. Then, reorganize the repository by grouping production code under a src/ directory to separate it from tooling. Additionally, add text alternatives for images and media to improve accessibility. Finally, enforce accessibility standards in the toolchain by integrating linting and testing tools to catch issues early.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).+3.6 ptsMediumData Protection
Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.+2.9 ptsMediumArchitecture documentation
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.+1.7 ptsMediumFolder & project structure
Add a text alternative — alt on images (alt="" for purely decorative ones), a title or aria-label on meaningful svg, and a captions <track> on video.+1.7 ptsMediumText alternatives
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.+0.7 ptsLowADR Quality
Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y (or vuejs-accessibility), assert with jest-axe / playwright-axe in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.+1.4 ptsMediumA11y enforcement
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.+1.3 ptsMediumCI/CD gates
Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.+1.3 ptsMediumDependency Hygiene

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 75 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 0% slop · 9% mixed · 91% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json4.4MixedJS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: [CVE redacted]
Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/package-lock.json4.8MixedJS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: [CVE redacted]
package-lock.json4.8MixedJS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: [CVE redacted]
Hosts/Hostel.Host/HostelService.cs5.8MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs7.2MixedCohesion (LCOM4): Low cohesion: HostelManagerActor (LCOM4 6)
SharpNetSH/ResponseProcessors/TabulatedObjectProcessor.cs7.8MixedCyclomatic Complexity: TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic (cyclomatic 16)
Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/BathRoomManagerActor.cs7.8MixedCohesion (LCOM4): Low cohesion: BathRoomManagerActor (LCOM4 4)
Domain/Commands/Owner.Command/Owner.Command.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Command
Domain/Commands/Tenant.Command/Tenant.Command.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Command
Domain/Commands/Reminder.Command/Reminder.Command.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Command
Domain/Commands/Notifier.Command/Notifier.Command.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Command
Domain/Events/Owner.Event/Owner.Event.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Event
Domain/Events/Reminder.Event/Reminder.Event.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Event
Domain/Events/Notifier.Event/Notifier.Event.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Event
Domain/Events/Tenant.Event/Tenant.Event.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Event
Domain/Entities/Reminder.Entity/Reminder.Entity.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Entity
Domain/Entities/Notifier.Entity/Notifier.Entity.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Entity
Domain/Entities/Tenant.Entity/Tenant.Entity.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Entity
Domain/Models/Reminder.Model/Reminder.Model.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Model
Domain/Models/Notifier.Model/Notifier.Model.csproj8.0Near-cleanDocumentation Quality: Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Model

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. 67 of 70 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.7 — 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 — 70 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D8D9D12D13D14D15D16D17D18D19D20D21D22D24D26D28D29D33D34D35D38AC1AC2AC3AC5AC6AC7AX1AX10AX2AX3AX5AX6C1C2ED1ED2ED3ED4GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P7P8R1R10R2R3R6R7R8R9S1X1X2X3X4

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
  1. 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, 221 of 283 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.)
  2. 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.
  3. 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.

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
jscpdCode duplication✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.301✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.301✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementQwen/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 019ee1ea-f17d-7fd1-8801-fede7d3dbac4.

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.

  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D31 IaC & Container Security — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity (jscpd) — it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (EF migration scaffolds, *.Designer.cs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only; the generated footprint is reported separately under Solution Shape.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the suite (`dotnet test --collect`) inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • 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 (EF migrations, designer files, snapshots) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
  • D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement.
  • 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.
  • D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities: JS/npm CVE matching reads package manifests and lockfiles — risk from how a dependency is used, and advisories not yet published, fall outside this scan.
  • 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.
  • AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
  • AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct, and component-wrapped fields (e.g. a <TextField>) are skipped. A clean result is "no unlabelled native control found", not a labelling proof.
  • AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials. Static readiness, not conformance.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — only literal inline colours and in-repo <style>-block CSS are read; external stylesheets, CSS-in-JS, computed/runtime/theme colour, and image contrast are all out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the markup itself shows.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • 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".

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (6): D19, D20, D21, D22, D24, M4 (model: Qwen/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score (documentation, ADR quality, naming, comment value, onboarding) — D25 sets the ADR-conformance fraction over sampled code, D22 judges API accuracy over a sample. These are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic at 16.

TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic (cyclomatic 16)SharpNetSH/ResponseProcessors/TabulatedObjectProcessor.cs:73

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D2 · Cognitive Complexity9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic at 36.

TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic (cognitive 36)SharpNetSH/ResponseProcessors/TabulatedObjectProcessor.cs:73

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D3 · God Classes10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 god class(es) detected.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md.

D4 · Code Duplication9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

4 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (82 lines × 2)Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Startup.cs:28
Duplicated block (13 lines × 2)Hosts/Hostel.Host/Startup.cs:46
Duplicated block (11 lines × 5)Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/Units/BathRoomActor.cs:25
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2)Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Controllers/Api.cs:35

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D5 · Coupling4.6 / 10Poor✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 4.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

Off the main sequence: Owner.Command · ×37

What to do

  1. Resolve the 37 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (37 warning-level).
  2. 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)8.5 / 10Healthy✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

6 of 47 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: HostelManagerActor (LCOM4 6) · ×6Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs:21

What to do

  1. Resolve the 6 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with BathRoomManagerActor.cs, FloorActor.cs, HostelActor.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  2. 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.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

No automated tests — the solution has no test code.

No automated tests

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Enforce Code Coverage in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D9 · Test Distribution0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No test projects found.

No tests found

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D12 · Dependency Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 outdated, 0 vulnerable, 0 deprecated packages.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 of 58 packages use a banned license.

Licenses scanned

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · 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.

D16 · Bus Factor10.0 / 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No source file's living knowledge is concentrated in a single author.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt9.7 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 deducted debt markers + 0 dead symbols across 9377 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.7.

EmptyCatchBlockHosts/Hostel.Host/HostelService.cs:53
TodoComment · ×2Shared/ObserverSubscriber.cs:7
CommentedOutCodeHosts/Hostel.Host/HostelService.cs:39
Justified suppression · ×3Hosts/SignalR.Host/Hubs/PortalHub.cs:45

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D18 · Solution Shape3.0 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 3.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

55 projects, 293 .cs files, 9377 hand-written lines of code (9377 production / 0 test), plus 2251 generated (EF migrations / designer / snapshots, excluded from quality), 52 inter-project edges (build failed).

Build failed
Shell project: Owner.Command · ×29Domain/Commands/Owner.Command/Owner.Command.csproj
Shared (Production)Shared/Shared.csproj
Owner.Command (Production)Domain/Commands/Owner.Command/Owner.Command.csproj
Tenant.Command (Production)Domain/Commands/Tenant.Command/Tenant.Command.csproj

+ 52 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 29 Shell project finding(s) in Solution Shape — start with Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular.csproj, Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular.csproj, Notifier.Command.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (29 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Build failed finding(s) in Solution Shape. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D19 · Documentation Quality / 10Critical◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Critical / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The documentation is extremely sparse and largely generic. The root README is a high-level, informal pitch with no technical depth, missing installation, configuration, or architecture details. The sub-project READMEs are standard Angular CLI templates that provide no project-specific context. Crucially, there are zero XML documentation comments across the entire codebase, meaning there is no inline code documentation. The lack of architecture or design documents further reduces the utility of the documentation.

Low XML-doc coverage: Shared · ×46Shared/Shared.csproj
The README is a generic Angular CLI template. It does not describe the specific purpose of this sub-project or how it integrates with the rest of the system. · ×2Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/README.md
XML-doc coverage: Owner.Entity · ×9Domain/Entities/Owner.Entity/Owner.Entity.csproj

What to do

  1. Resolve the 46 Low XML-doc coverage finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with Akka.Extension.csproj, Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console.csproj, Akka.MassTransit.Logger.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (46 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 The README is a generic Angular CLI template. It does not describe the… finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).

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

D20 · ADR Quality / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Critical / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

  1. 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.

D21 · Naming Consistency / 10Poor◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Poor / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

9 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

The concept of 'Tenancy' is represented by the type `Hostel.Model.Tenant.Tenancy`. However, there is also a type `Hostel.Model.Tenant` which likely represents the same or a related concept, creating ambiguity between the namespace `Hostel.Model.Tenant` and the type `Tenancy` within it.
Inconsistent naming for command types: some use a plural noun for the object being created (e.g., `CreateBathRoom` vs `CreateRoom`), while others use singular or different structures. Specifically, `CreateBathRoom` and `CreateRoom` use singular nouns, but `CreateBathRooms` (method) uses plural. Also, `CreateSepticTank` vs `CreateWaterReservoir` vs `CreateFloor` show inconsistency in whether the object name is singular or plural in the command type vs method name.
Inconsistent naming for event types: some use `Created` prefix (e.g., `CreatedRoom`, `CreatedToilet`), while others use `RentedOut` or just the entity name (`InstalledSensor`, `SepticTank`). This makes it unclear if these are all domain events or if some are commands.
Inconsistent naming for state classes: some use `...State` (e.g., `WaterReservoirState`), while others use `...ManagerState` or `...SensorState`. The term `State` is used, but the prefix varies between `WaterReservoir`, `SepticTank`, `Floor`, `Sensor`. This is a minor inconsistency in how the state is named relative to the entity.
The property `Commander` is used across multiple command types. While this might be intentional, it is a generic name that could be more specific (e.g., `CommandId` or `CommandType`). However, looking at `Hostel.Event.InstalledSensor.CommandId` and `Hostel.Event.Created.CreatedRoom.CommandId`, there is a mix of `Commander` and `CommandId` for similar concepts.

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 The concept of 'Tenancy' is represented by the type… finding(s) in Naming Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming for command types finding(s) in Naming Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Inconsistent naming for event types finding(s) in Naming Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D22 · Internal API Consistency / 10Exemplary◐ 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

No public API surface exposed; nothing to be inconsistent.

No exposed public API

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D24 · Comment Value / 10Poor◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective Poor / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

12 valuable / 45 redundant across 200 sampled comments; 3 shown with locations.

redundant comment · ×2Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Construction.cs:161
misleading commentHosts/IdentityServer.Host/Controllers/DeviceController.cs:97

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with ConsentController.cs, Construction.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 misleading comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with DeviceController.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D26 · Project Cohesion10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 of 55 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

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

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

Method: Git-history secret scan via gitleaks detect over full history in an isolated checkout; each match flagged High. Exhaustive; degrades cleanly when tool absent.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep --config auto across the repo; severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a 0-10 wide normalizer. 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: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

semgrep found no security issues.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md.

D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether JavaScript/npm dependencies have known published vulnerabilities (CVEs) — the npm ecosystem's biggest risk.

Method: JS/npm CVE scan via trivy fs --scanners vuln over JS manifests (package.json/yarn.lock/pnpm-lock/bun.lockb); 0-10 tight normalizer. NotApplicable without JS manifests. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

178 finding(s): 12 critical, 87 high, 77 medium, 2 low.

High CVE: [CVE redacted] · ×38Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.jsondetected by trivy finding
Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] · ×12Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.jsondetected by trivy finding

What to do

  1. Resolve the 38 High CVE finding(s) in JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with package-lock.json (38). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (38 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 12 Critical CVE finding(s) in JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with package-lock.json (12). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (12 issue-level).

Detailed fixes: d33_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

D35 · Change Coupling9.7 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling; coupling through a build step, config, or non-source file isn't seen.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: SepticTankState.cs↔WaterReservoirState.cs 80%; account.component.ts↔register.component.ts 73%; BathRoomManagerActor.cs↔FloorActor.cs 69%

Change coupling: SepticTankState.cs ↔ WaterReservoirState.cs · ×8Domain/States/Hostel.State/SepticTankState.cs

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D38 · OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether dependencies have known published vulnerabilities (CVEs) per the OSV database — npm and other lockfile ecosystems, parsed natively. Complements D33 (npm via trivy) and D30 (.NET via dotnet).

Method: npm/multi-ecosystem CVE scan via osv-scanner (queries the osv.dev database + parses lockfiles natively: package-lock/yarn/pnpm/bun); severity tally (Critical/High/Medium/Low) to 0-10 tight normalizer (8.0). NotApplicable without a JS lockfile. Additive to D33 (trivy fs); exhaustive + deterministic, DB kept fresh.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No known-vulnerable dependencies (OSV).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d38_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AC1 · Text alternatives2.9 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative. (×5) — Index.cshtml:8, UserCodeConfirmation.cshtml:8, Index.cshtml:31, …

What to do

  • Add a text alternative — alt on images (alt="" for purely decorative ones), a title or aria-label on meaningful svg, and a captions <track> on video.
AC2 · Forms & labels5.2 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, fieldsets have a legend, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

  • A fieldset groups related controls but has no <legend> to name the group. Add a <legend> as its first child. (×2) — Login.cshtml:24, Logout.cshtml:13
  • This control has no associated label. Add a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it. (×4) — UserCodeCapture.cshtml:11, account.component.html:14, register.component.html:35, …

What to do

  • Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.
AC3 · Page structure4.8 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether pages declare a language and title, expose a main landmark and a sane heading order, keep zoom enabled, title their iframes and avoid meta-refresh. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

  • An iframe with no title is announced only as "frame". Add a title describing its content. — LoggedOut.cshtml:21
  • Skipping heading levels breaks the document outline assistive tech relies on. Don't jump levels — increase by at most one. (×2) — Login.cshtml:17, Index.cshtml:5
  • The page declares no language, so assistive tech can't pick the right pronunciation. Add lang (e.g. lang="en"). (×3) — _Layout.cshtml:0, _Layout.cshtml:2, _Layout.cshtml:2
  • A page with no <title> gives no name in the tab, history or screen-reader page list. Add a descriptive <title> in <head>. (×2) — _Layout.cshtml:0, _Layout.cshtml:2
  • No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. (×6) — _Layout.cshtml:0, index.html:2, Index.cshtml:2, …

What to do

  • Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.
AC5 · ARIA correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, and no aria-hidden on a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

AC6 · Visual & motion safety10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether focus outlines aren't removed without a replacement, motion respects prefers-reduced-motion, and literal CSS colour pairs meet contrast — PARTIAL: only inline styles and in-repo CSS literals are visible, never computed or runtime colour. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

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

Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility) configured, and axe/pa11y/Lighthouse wired into tests or CI — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.

Method: Repo config/CI scan: an a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility) configured, and axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI, graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.

  • No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time.

What to do

  • Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y (or vuejs-accessibility), assert with jest-axe / playwright-axe in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

AX10 · Code composition6.2 / 10Fair✓ 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.

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.

AX2 · Stateful singletons5.4 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `HostelService` is a singleton (one shared instance) but mutates instance state outside any lock (_actorSystem; e.g. `_actorSystem` at line 51). — HostelService.cs:22

What to do

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

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

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

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

AX6 · Interface segregation9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: public interface member counts; fat-interface threshold (over 15 members) flagged per type. Deterministic, type-level.

  • `IDataTypes` declares 17 members. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — IDataTypes.cs:5

What to do

  • Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
C1 · Data Protection0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No data-protection or encryption usage (ASP.NET Data Protection, AES, column encryption, PBKDF2) was found — sensitive data at rest may be unprotected. If TDE/KMS/vault is delegated to infrastructure, ignore.

What to do

  • Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
  • Enforce HTTPS (UseHttpsRedirection / RequireHttpsMetadata) so data in transit is always encrypted.
C2 · Access Controls10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether access is authorized by default — [Authorize]/policies or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from handlers.

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

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

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

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

ED2 · Event/command shape10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether commands have a single handler (one owner of the decision) and fan-out is modelled with events.

Method: Roslyn scan (event-driven gated): command-shaped messages identified by convention; handler count per command checked for the exactly-one rule. Deterministic, hard fact.

ED3 · Event naming10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether events are named in the past tense (a clarity nudge — low weight).

Method: Roslyn scan (event-driven gated): domain and integration events checked for past-tense naming (-ed/-en suffix or irregular set). Naming nudge, low-weight advisory.

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

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

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

GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code9.9 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×5) — RentedOutRoom.cs:15, RentedOutRoom.cs:17, SensorHandler.cs:11, …

What to do

  • Finish or delete NotImplementedException stubs and replace placeholder literals before shipping.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs7.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

  • `Handle` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — SensorHandler.cs:9
  • `Update` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×2) — SensorManagerState.cs:13, SensorState.cs:30
  • `ProcessLoginCallbackForWsFed` takes parameters but its body is empty — it accepts inputs and does nothing. Either implement it or remove it. — ExternalController.cs:228
  • `ProcessLoginCallbackForSaml2p` takes parameters but its body is empty — it accepts inputs and does nothing. Either implement it or remove it. — ExternalController.cs:232
  • `Configure` takes parameters but its body is empty — it accepts inputs and does nothing. Either implement it or remove it. — AutoRefreshConfigureCookieOptions.cs:15
  • A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). (×24) — RoomManagerActor.cs:45, HostActorRef.cs:16, HostelService.cs:30, …

What to do

  • Finish or delete the unfinished stubs (NotImplementedException / empty / constant-returning bodies) — they are dead surface that looks live.
  • Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.
M1 · Documentation (README)6.1 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
  • 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 53 of 55 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.9 pts.
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 — decisions aren't captured for future maintainers.
  • No C4/PlantUML/Mermaid diagram or architecture.md — the high-level shape isn't documented.

What to do

  • Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.
  • Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure4.0 / 10Poor✓ 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.

  • Projects aren't grouped under a src/ folder — production and tooling code are mixed at the root.
  • Test projects aren't grouped under a tests/ folder — the test surface isn't separable from production code at a glance.
  • Only 12/55 projects share a common root namespace — the code's module identity is inconsistent.

What to do

  • Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
  • Group test projects under tests/ (or test/, spec/) so the test surface is discoverable and CI can scope it.
  • Adopt a consistent root-namespace convention (a shared prefix, e.g. Acme.*); short project-file/directory names are fine as long as the RootNamespace is uniform.
M4 · Documentation accuracy8.0 / 10Healthy◐ 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.

  • The README lists the tool-set including Akka.NET, MassTransit, SignalR, SQL, ML.NET, Quartz.NET, Xamarin.Forms, Asp.Net Core, IdentityServer4, xca, and Angular.

What to do

  • Reconcile the README with reality: The README lists the tool-set including Akka.NET, MassTransit, SignalR, SQL, ML.NET, Quartz.NET, Xamarin.Forms, Asp.Net Core, IdentityServer4, xca, and Angular..
P1 · CI/CD gates0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

  • Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
P2 · Observability4.5 / 10Poor✓ 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 2/11 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log).

What to do

  • Extend structured logging to the remaining service-like projects so the whole executable surface is diagnosable in production.
  • Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics and a health-check endpoint for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Filesystem/Roslyn scan: CodeQL, Dependabot, secret-scanning, and BenchmarkDotNet presence in pipelines and projects. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No static application security testing (CodeQL / security analyzers / codehealth) detected.

What to do

  • Add a SAST step (e.g. CodeQL) or a security analyzer package.
  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Deployment automation exists but no readiness/liveness probes, rolling-update strategy, lifecycle hooks or migration job were evidenced — a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.

What to do

  • Add readiness/liveness probes and a rolling-update (or blue/green) strategy so a bad release is caught and rolled back automatically.
  • Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience3.0 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: Polly resilience markers (Retry, CircuitBreaker, Timeout) on outbound HTTP invocations. Computed per type, deterministic.

  • The app makes outbound HTTP calls but no resilience handler was detected (Polly / AddStandardResilienceHandler / circuit-breaker). A slow or failing dependency will cascade — add timeouts, retries with back-off, and a circuit breaker.

What to do

  • Add `AddStandardResilienceHandler()` (or Polly policies) to your HttpClient registrations so a flaky dependency can't take the app down.
P8 · Schema migrations10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Roslyn scan: EF Core DbContext for a versioned migrations directory versus bare EnsureCreated usage. Exhaustive per project, deterministic.

R1 · Type Safety9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Migrate the remaining .js/.jsx files to TypeScript.
R10 · Code Duplication3.9 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Copy-pasted token-identical blocks across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386).

Method: Copy-pasted token-identical blocks across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Deterministic.

  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/protractor.conf.js:4 · Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/protractor.conf.js:4 — protractor.conf.js:4
  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/test.ts:4 · Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/src/test.ts:4 — test.ts:4
  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/app/app.module.ts:14 · Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/src/app/app.module.ts:6 — app.module.ts:14
  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/karma.conf.js:6 · Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/karma.conf.js:6 — karma.conf.js:6
  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/app/components/home/account.component.ts:57 · Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/app/components/home/register.component.ts:59 — account.component.ts:57
  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/main.ts:7 · Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/src/main.ts:7 — main.ts:7
  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/e2e/app.e2e-spec.ts:1 · Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/e2e/app.e2e-spec.ts:1 — app.e2e-spec.ts:1
  • Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/app/services/home.service.ts:1 · Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/src/app/services/home.service.ts:1 — home.service.ts:1

What to do

  • Extract the duplicated blocks into shared functions/components.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

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

R6 · Tooling6.7 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Whether the package.json wires up test, lint and typecheck scripts.

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

  • test ✓ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✗

What to do

  • Add the missing scripts (eslint, tsc --noEmit) and run them in CI.
R7 · Dead Code0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Unreachable from the 2 application, 12 tooling and 4 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. Gate removals on your build/type-check — an undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
  • no import path from any entry point (2 application, 12 tooling, 4 test roots considered) (×7) — home.service.ts, signalr.service.ts, home.component.ts, …

What to do

  • Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Imported but not declared in any reachable package.json — installs work only by hoisting accident. — account.component.ts:8
  • Declared in Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — dead weight and attack surface. Verify against build tooling before removing. (×3)

What to do

  • Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.
R9 · Circular Imports10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

S1 · Web-Security Posture10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. Deterministic.

  • `RequireHttpsMetadata = false` allows the OIDC discovery doc to be fetched over plain HTTP. Safe for loopback-only fetches (Aspire / on-host); risky for any other path. — Startup.cs:59

What to do

  • Set RequireHttpsMetadata = true in prod (or pin MetadataAddress to a localhost URL the API can hit directly).
X1 · Async correctness5.5 / 10Fair✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Make the caller `async` and `await` instead. (×5) — HostelManagerActor.cs:52, TraceLogger.cs:66, AutoRefreshConfigureCookieOptions.cs:12, …

What to do

  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk)
X2 · Cancellation propagation4.4 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

  • Only 3/48 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so requests can't be cancelled cleanly under load or on client disconnect. In Blazor Server circuits and other short-write hosts, omitting it can be an accepted convention — judge against your hosting model.
  • No CancellationToken parameter — work can't be cancelled cleanly on disconnect/shutdown. (×25) — QueueLogger.cs:39, QueueLogger.cs:81, Api.cs:25, …

What to do

  • Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
X3 · Exception handling4.5 / 10Poor✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `throw e;` resets the exception's stack trace to this line, hiding where it really came from. Use a bare `throw;` to preserve the original stack. (×3) — Repository.cs:36, Repository.cs:95, Repository.cs:103
  • `throw ex;` resets the exception's stack trace to this line, hiding where it really came from. Use a bare `throw;` to preserve the original stack. — Repository.cs:136
  • An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. — HostelService.cs:53

What to do

  • Rethrow loses stack trace (`throw ex;`)
X4 · Structured logging10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. Deterministic.

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 13 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria — partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

DimensionWCAG 2.2 A/AA criteriaCoverage
AC1 · Text alternatives1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness4.1.2Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety1.4.3, 2.4.7Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcementenforcement — no page criterionEnforcement posture (process)

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.

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health42%Poor — gated by D18, R10, R7Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture75%HealthySolid.
Maturity43%Poor — gated by M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness16%Critical — gated by D8, D9, R8, P1, P3, P7Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security57%Fair — gated by D33, C1Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event-Driven100%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Accessibility50%Poor — gated by AC1Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Not included — 35 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.

  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
  • AX4 Dependency direction — not applicable to a CQRS architecture (the inward-dependency rule is for layered/clean styles)
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • C3 Audit Trail — Repo shows no audit-logging mechanism (IAuditable, an immutable audit log, an EF SaveChanges interceptor) for sensitive changes — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Record an audit trail in code (or document where it lives) so this dimension can be scored.
  • C4 Data Retention — Repo shows no data-retention / TTL / cleanup mechanism for personal data — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Define retention periods and a purge/cleanup job (or TTL) in code, or document where retention is enforced, so this dimension can be scored.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Repo shows no corroborated data-subject-rights mechanism (erasure / export-portability / consent) tied to a subject id or GDPR vocabulary — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Implement erasure, data export/portability and consent tracking over the subject's records.
  • D10 Test Quality — No tests in the analyzed solution to assess for quality.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — Bounded contexts not declared
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D27 Navigability — Navigability unmeasured — symbol resolution incomplete
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not applicable
  • D31 IaC & Container Security — Not applicable
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — Not applicable
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — Not applicable
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — Not applicable
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — No checkable ADRs to assess
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — not run — 0/3 markers found
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not run — 0/3 markers found
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
  • P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
  • P6 Release Hygiene — not evidenced — no changelog, version stamp or semver release tag in the repo
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — run tests with `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` (or in CI) to enable this cross-layer check
  • PF1 Benchmark discipline — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
  • PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
  • R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
  • R4 Test Coverage — 4 test file(s) reach none of 34 production file(s) via imports — exercised outside the JS import graph (integration/bundled), not import-reachable
  • R5 Dependency Freshness — npm is not installed — dependency freshness not measured; JS/npm CVEs are scored in D33 (JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities)
  • X5 Nullable reference types — no NRT-eligible projects
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — no data
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — no data

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.

Issue — 52 finding(s)
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×38
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/common: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/common: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/common: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/common: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/common: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/compiler: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/compiler: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/core: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/core: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/core: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/platform-server: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/platform-server: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/platform-server: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/platform-server: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — @angular/platform-server: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — cross-spawn: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — form-data: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — lodash: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — lodash: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — minimatch: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — minimatch: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — minimatch: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — minimatch: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — node-fetch: [CVE redacted]
  • High CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — qs: [CVE redacted]
  • + 13 more in this group — see findings.md.
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE · ×12
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — eventsource: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — form-data: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — json-schema: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/package-lock.json — url-parse: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/package-lock.json — eventsource: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/package-lock.json — form-data: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/package-lock.json — json-schema: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/package-lock.json — url-parse: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] package-lock.json — eventsource: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] package-lock.json — form-data: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] package-lock.json — json-schema: [CVE redacted]
  • Critical CVE: [CVE redacted] package-lock.json — url-parse: [CVE redacted]
D17 · Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock · ×1
  • EmptyCatchBlock Hosts/Hostel.Host/HostelService.cs:53 — empty catch block
D8 · Code Coverage · No automated tests · ×1
  • No automated tests — No automated tests — the solution has no test code. Untested code is the largest single risk to changing it safely.
Warning — 107 finding(s)
D19 · Documentation Quality · Low XML-doc coverage · ×46
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Shared Shared/Shared.csproj — Shared: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/72).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Command Domain/Commands/Owner.Command/Owner.Command.csproj — Owner.Command: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Command Domain/Commands/Tenant.Command/Tenant.Command.csproj — Tenant.Command: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Command Domain/Commands/Hostel.Command/Hostel.Command.csproj — Hostel.Command: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/88).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Command Domain/Commands/Reminder.Command/Reminder.Command.csproj — Reminder.Command: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Command Domain/Commands/Notifier.Command/Notifier.Command.csproj — Notifier.Command: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Event Domain/Events/Owner.Event/Owner.Event.csproj — Owner.Event: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Event Domain/Events/Hostel.Event/Hostel.Event.csproj — Hostel.Event: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/52).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Event Domain/Events/Reminder.Event/Reminder.Event.csproj — Reminder.Event: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Event Domain/Events/Notifier.Event/Notifier.Event.csproj — Notifier.Event: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Event Domain/Events/Tenant.Event/Tenant.Event.csproj — Tenant.Event: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Entity Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Hostel.Entity.csproj — Hostel.Entity: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/62).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Entity Domain/Entities/Reminder.Entity/Reminder.Entity.csproj — Reminder.Entity: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Entity Domain/Entities/Notifier.Entity/Notifier.Entity.csproj — Notifier.Entity: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Entity Domain/Entities/Tenant.Entity/Tenant.Entity.csproj — Tenant.Entity: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Model Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Hostel.Model.csproj — Hostel.Model: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/117).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Model Domain/Models/Reminder.Model/Reminder.Model.csproj — Reminder.Model: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Model Domain/Models/Notifier.Model/Notifier.Model.csproj — Notifier.Model: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Model Domain/Models/Owner.Model/Owner.Model.csproj — Owner.Model: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Model Domain/Models/Tenant.Model/Tenant.Model.csproj — Tenant.Model: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Query Domain/Queries/Hostel.Query/Hostel.Query.csproj — Hostel.Query: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/3).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Query Domain/Queries/Reminder.Query/Reminder.Query.csproj — Reminder.Query: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Query Domain/Queries/Notifier.Query/Notifier.Query.csproj — Notifier.Query: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Owner.Query Domain/Queries/Owner.Query/Owner.Query.csproj — Owner.Query: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • Low XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Query Domain/Queries/Tenant.Query/Tenant.Query.csproj — Tenant.Query: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/1).
  • + 21 more in this group — see findings.md.
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×37
  • Off the main sequence: Owner.Command — Owner.Command: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Tenant.Command — Tenant.Command: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Reminder.Command — Reminder.Command: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Notifier.Command — Notifier.Command: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Owner.Event — Owner.Event: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Reminder.Event — Reminder.Event: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Notifier.Event — Notifier.Event: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Tenant.Event — Tenant.Event: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Reminder.Entity — Reminder.Entity: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Notifier.Entity — Notifier.Entity: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Owner.Entity — Owner.Entity: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Tenant.Entity — Tenant.Entity: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Hostel.Model — Hostel.Model: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Reminder.Model — Reminder.Model: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Notifier.Model — Notifier.Model: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Owner.Model — Owner.Model: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Tenant.Model — Tenant.Model: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Hostel.Query — Hostel.Query: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Reminder.Query — Reminder.Query: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Notifier.Query — Notifier.Query: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Owner.Query — Owner.Query: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Tenant.Query — Tenant.Query: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Notifier.Host — Notifier.Host: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Reminder.Host — Reminder.Host: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: Owner.Host — Owner.Host: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • + 12 more in this group — see findings.md.
D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×8
  • Change coupling: SepticTankState.cs ↔ WaterReservoirState.cs Domain/States/Hostel.State/SepticTankState.cs — `Domain/States/Hostel.State/SepticTankState.cs` and `Domain/States/Hostel.State/WaterReservoirState.cs` change together 80% of the time (8 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: account.component.ts ↔ register.component.ts Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/app/components/home/account.component.ts — `Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/app/components/home/account.component.ts` and `Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/src/app/components/home/register.component.ts` change together 73% of the time (8 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: BathRoomManagerActor.cs ↔ FloorActor.cs Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/BathRoomManagerActor.cs — `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/BathRoomManagerActor.cs` and `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/FloorActor.cs` change together 69% of the time (9 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: HostelManagerHandler.cs ↔ HostelManagerActor.cs Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Handler/HostelManagerHandler.cs — `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Handler/HostelManagerHandler.cs` and `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs` change together 60% of the time (6 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: HostelManagerActor.cs ↔ SepticTankState.cs Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs — `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs` and `Domain/States/Hostel.State/SepticTankState.cs` change together 60% of the time (6 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: HostelManagerActor.cs ↔ Floor.cs Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs — `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs` and `Domain/Repositories/Hostel.Repository/Floor.cs` change together 50% of the time (7 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: FloorHandler.cs ↔ HostelManagerHandler.cs Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Handler/FloorHandler.cs — `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Handler/FloorHandler.cs` and `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Handler/HostelManagerHandler.cs` change together 50% of the time (5 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
  • Change coupling: HostelManagerActor.cs ↔ WaterReservoirState.cs Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs — `Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs` and `Domain/States/Hostel.State/WaterReservoirState.cs` change together 50% of the time (5 shared commits) with no explicit dependency — a hidden/logical coupling. If they belong together, co-locate them; if not, break the coupling.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×6
  • Low cohesion: HostelManagerActor (LCOM4 6) Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/HostelManagerActor.cs:21 — HostelManagerActor's methods form 6 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: HostelActor (LCOM4 5) Shared/Actors/HostelActor.cs:10 — HostelActor's methods form 5 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: BathRoomManagerActor (LCOM4 4) Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/BathRoomManagerActor.cs:15 — BathRoomManagerActor's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: FloorActor (LCOM4 4) Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/FloorActor.cs:17 — FloorActor's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: RoomManagerActor (LCOM4 4) Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/RoomManagerActor.cs:15 — RoomManagerActor's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: ToiletManagerActor (LCOM4 4) Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/ToiletManagerActor.cs:15 — ToiletManagerActor's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×2
  • TodoComment Shared/ObserverSubscriber.cs:7 — // TODO Double check the reactive streams spec. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment SharpNetSH/Utilities/ExtensionMethods.cs:24 — // TODO: Determine if we need to handle 'void' methods - currently we don't — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic (cyclomatic 16) SharpNetSH/ResponseProcessors/TabulatedObjectProcessor.cs:73 — TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15).
D17 · Explicit Debt · CommentedOutCode · ×1
  • CommentedOutCode Hosts/Hostel.Host/HostelService.cs:39 — 3 consecutive commented-code lines
D18 · Solution Shape · Build failed · ×1
  • Build failed — The target solution did not build cleanly (errors: 3), which caps Solution Shape at 3/10 — the most basic shape signal is that it compiles. First errors: MSB4278: The imported file "$(MSBuildExtensionsPath)/Microsoft/VisualStudio/v$(VisualStudioVersion)/SSDT/Microsoft.Data.Tools.Schema.SqlTasks.targets" does not exist and appears to be part of a Visual Studio component. This file may require MSBuild.exe in order to be imported successfully, and so may fail to build in the dotnet CLI.; CS0103: The name 'WebHost' does not exist in the current context.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic (cognitive 36) · ×1
  • TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic (cognitive 36) SharpNetSH/ResponseProcessors/TabulatedObjectProcessor.cs:73 — TabulatedObjectProcessor.RecursivelyFlattenToDynamic has cognitive complexity 36 (threshold 15).
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (82 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (82 lines × 2) Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Startup.cs:28 — Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Startup.cs:28-49 | Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC/Startup.cs:35-116
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) Hosts/Hostel.Host/Startup.cs:46 — Hosts/Hostel.Host/Startup.cs:46-58 | Hosts/SignalR.Host/Startup.cs:77-80
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/Units/BathRoomActor.cs:25 — Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/Units/BathRoomActor.cs:25-35 | Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/Units/KitchenActor.cs:25-35 | Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Floor/Units/ToiletActor.cs:26-36 | Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/SepticTankActor.cs:26-36 | Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/WaterReservoirActor.cs:25-35
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Controllers/Api.cs:35 — Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Controllers/Api.cs:35-45 | Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Controllers/Api.cs:56-65
Recommendation — 55 finding(s)
D18 · Solution Shape · Shell project · ×29
  • Shell project: Owner.Command Domain/Commands/Owner.Command/Owner.Command.csproj — `Owner.Command` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Tenant.Command Domain/Commands/Tenant.Command/Tenant.Command.csproj — `Tenant.Command` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Reminder.Command Domain/Commands/Reminder.Command/Reminder.Command.csproj — `Reminder.Command` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Notifier.Command Domain/Commands/Notifier.Command/Notifier.Command.csproj — `Notifier.Command` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Owner.Event Domain/Events/Owner.Event/Owner.Event.csproj — `Owner.Event` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Reminder.Event Domain/Events/Reminder.Event/Reminder.Event.csproj — `Reminder.Event` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Notifier.Event Domain/Events/Notifier.Event/Notifier.Event.csproj — `Notifier.Event` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Tenant.Event Domain/Events/Tenant.Event/Tenant.Event.csproj — `Tenant.Event` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Reminder.Entity Domain/Entities/Reminder.Entity/Reminder.Entity.csproj — `Reminder.Entity` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Notifier.Entity Domain/Entities/Notifier.Entity/Notifier.Entity.csproj — `Notifier.Entity` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Tenant.Entity Domain/Entities/Tenant.Entity/Tenant.Entity.csproj — `Tenant.Entity` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Reminder.Model Domain/Models/Reminder.Model/Reminder.Model.csproj — `Reminder.Model` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Notifier.Model Domain/Models/Notifier.Model/Notifier.Model.csproj — `Notifier.Model` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Owner.Model Domain/Models/Owner.Model/Owner.Model.csproj — `Owner.Model` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Tenant.Model Domain/Models/Tenant.Model/Tenant.Model.csproj — `Tenant.Model` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Reminder.Query Domain/Queries/Reminder.Query/Reminder.Query.csproj — `Reminder.Query` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Notifier.Query Domain/Queries/Notifier.Query/Notifier.Query.csproj — `Notifier.Query` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Owner.Query Domain/Queries/Owner.Query/Owner.Query.csproj — `Owner.Query` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Tenant.Query Domain/Queries/Tenant.Query/Tenant.Query.csproj — `Tenant.Query` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Notifier.State Domain/States/Notifier.State/Notifier.State.csproj — `Notifier.State` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Owner.State Domain/States/Owner.State/Owner.State.csproj — `Owner.State` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Reminder.State Domain/States/Reminder.State/Reminder.State.csproj — `Reminder.State` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Tenant.State Domain/States/Tenant.State/Tenant.State.csproj — `Tenant.State` contributes only 0 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Notifier.Repository Domain/Repositories/Notifier.Repository/Notifier.Repository.csproj — `Notifier.Repository` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: Owner.Repository Domain/Repositories/Owner.Repository/Owner.Repository.csproj — `Owner.Repository` contributes only 7 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • + 4 more in this group — see findings.md.
D19 · Documentation Quality · The README is a generic Angular CLI template. It does not describe the specific purpose of this sub-project or how it integrates with the rest of the system. · ×2
  • The README is a generic Angular CLI template. It does not describe the specific purpose of this sub-project or how it integrates with the rest of the system. Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/README.md — Replace the generic template with a custom README that explains the specific role of the Angular Portal, its dependencies, and how to run it in the context of the larger solution.
  • The README is a generic Angular CLI template. It does not describe the specific purpose of this sub-project or how it integrates with the rest of the system. Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/README.md — Replace the generic template with a custom README that explains the specific role of the Angular Landing page, its dependencies, and how to run it in the context of the larger solution.
D24 · Comment Value · redundant comment · ×2
  • redundant comment Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Construction.cs:161 — "// Feet" — Remove. This is a single-word label that likely duplicates a variable or property name.
  • redundant comment Hosts/IdentityServer.Host/Controllers/ConsentController.cs:1 — "// Copyright (c) Brock Allen & Dominick Baier. All rights reserved." — Remove. Copyright headers are usually handled by templates or separate files, not inline comments.
D11 · Test Reliability · Test reliability not included · ×1
  • Test reliability not included — No test projects found, so reliability couldn't be assessed.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found at common paths; consider documenting architectural decisions in Docs/ADL/ or similar.
D21 · Naming Consistency · The concept of 'Tenancy' is represented by the type `Hostel.Model.Tenant.Tenancy`. However, there is also a type `Hostel.Model.Tenant` which likely represents the same or a related concept, creating ambiguity between the namespace `Hostel.Model.Tenant` and the type `Tenancy` within it. · ×1
  • The concept of 'Tenancy' is represented by the type `Hostel.Model.Tenant.Tenancy`. However, there is also a type `Hostel.Model.Tenant` which likely represents the same or a related concept, creating ambiguity between the namespace `Hostel.Model.Tenant` and the type `Tenancy` within it. — Ensure `Hostel.Model.Tenant` is not a namespace that conflicts with or duplicates the concept of `Tenancy`. If `Tenant` is a namespace, ensure it doesn't shadow or confuse the `Tenancy` type. (symbols: Hostel.Model.Tenant.Tenancy, Hostel.Model.Tenant.Tenancy)
D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent naming for command types · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for command types: some use a plural noun for the object being created (e.g., `CreateBathRoom` vs `CreateRoom`), while others use singular or different structures. Specifically, `CreateBathRoom` and `CreateRoom` use singular nouns, but `CreateBathRooms` (method) uses plural. Also, `CreateSepticTank` vs `CreateWaterReservoir` vs `CreateFloor` show inconsistency in whether the object name is singular or plural in the command type vs method name. — Standardize command types to use singular nouns for the entity being created (e.g., `CreateBathRoom`, `CreateWaterReservoir`). Ensure method names match the type naming convention (e.g., `CreateBathRoom` method creates a `CreateBathRoom` command). (symbols: Hostel.Command.Create.CreateBathRoom, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateWaterReservoir, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateSepticTank, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateRoom, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateFloor)
D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent naming for event types · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for event types: some use `Created` prefix (e.g., `CreatedRoom`, `CreatedToilet`), while others use `RentedOut` or just the entity name (`InstalledSensor`, `SepticTank`). This makes it unclear if these are all domain events or if some are commands. — Standardize event naming to follow a consistent pattern, such as `RoomCreatedEvent` or `CreatedRoomEvent` for all creation events. (symbols: Hostel.Event.InstalledSensor, Hostel.Event.Created.CreatedRoom, Hostel.Event.Created.CreatedToilet, Hostel.Event.Floor.RentedOutRoom, Hostel.Event.SepticTank)
D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent naming for state classes · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for state classes: some use `...State` (e.g., `WaterReservoirState`), while others use `...ManagerState` or `...SensorState`. The term `State` is used, but the prefix varies between `WaterReservoir`, `SepticTank`, `Floor`, `Sensor`. This is a minor inconsistency in how the state is named relative to the entity. — Ensure all state classes follow the pattern `EntityNameState` (e.g., `WaterReservoirState`, `SepticTankState`, `FloorState`). Avoid mixing `ManagerState` or `SensorState` if they represent the same kind of object. (symbols: Hostel.State.WaterReservoirState, Hostel.State.SepticTankState, Hostel.State.Floor.BathRoomManagerState, Hostel.State.Floor.ToiletManagerState, Hostel.State.Sensor.SensorState)
D21 · Naming Consistency · The property `Commander` is used across multiple command types. While this might be intentional, it is a generic name that could be more specific (e.g., `CommandId` or `CommandType`). However, looking at `Hostel.Event.InstalledSensor.CommandId` and `Hostel.Event.Created.CreatedRoom.CommandId`, there is a mix of `Commander` and `CommandId` for similar concepts. · ×1
  • The property `Commander` is used across multiple command types. While this might be intentional, it is a generic name that could be more specific (e.g., `CommandId` or `CommandType`). However, looking at `Hostel.Event.InstalledSensor.CommandId` and `Hostel.Event.Created.CreatedRoom.CommandId`, there is a mix of `Commander` and `CommandId` for similar concepts. — Standardize the property name for the command identifier or type. If it's an ID, use `CommandId`. If it's a type, use `CommandType` or `Commander` consistently. (symbols: Hostel.Command.Create.CreateBathRoom.Commander, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateWaterReservoir.Commander, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateSepticTank.Commander, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateRoom.Commander, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateFloor.Commander)
D21 · Naming Consistency · The property `ReplyToQueue` is used in both `Shared.IQuery` and specific command types. This suggests a shared interface or base class is being used, but the naming `ReplyToQueue` might be misleading if it's not a queue but a topic or channel. · ×1
  • The property `ReplyToQueue` is used in both `Shared.IQuery` and specific command types. This suggests a shared interface or base class is being used, but the naming `ReplyToQueue` might be misleading if it's not a queue but a topic or channel. — If `ReplyToQueue` is a standard property for all commands/queries, ensure the name accurately reflects its purpose. Consider `ResponseQueue` or `ReplyChannel` if it's not strictly a queue. (symbols: Shared.IQuery.ReplyToQueue, Hostel.Command.Create.CreateBathRoom.ReplyToQueue, Hostel.Command.RentOutRoom.ReplyToQueue)
D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent naming for tenant-related properties · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for tenant-related properties: `Birthday.Month` vs `Tenancy.Price` vs `Tenancy.PaymentType`. The tenant model has a mix of simple properties and nested objects (`Issue`, `Tenancy`). — Ensure all tenant-related data is consistently structured, either all flat or all nested. If `Tenancy` is a nested object, ensure `Birthday` is also a nested object or all properties are flat. (symbols: Hostel.Model.Tenant.Birthday.Month, Hostel.Model.Tenant.Tenancy.Price, Hostel.Model.Tenant.Tenancy.PaymentType, Hostel.Model.Tenant.Issue.IssueDate)
D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent naming for actors/handlers · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for actors/handlers: some use `...Actor` (e.g., `BathRoomManagerActor`), while others use `...Handler` (e.g., `WaterReservoirHandler`). This suggests a mix of Akka actors and standard handlers. — Standardize on `...Actor` for all Akka actors or `...Handler` for all handlers. Avoid mixing `Actor` and `Handler` for similar responsibilities. (symbols: Hostel.Entity.Floor.BathRoomManagerActor, Hostel.Entity.Floor.ToiletManagerActor, Hostel.Entity.Floor.FloorActor, Hostel.Entity.Handler.WaterReservoirHandler, Hostel.Entity.Handler.HostelManagerHandler)
D21 · Naming Consistency · Inconsistent naming for specification objects · ×1
  • Inconsistent naming for specification objects: some use `...Spec` (e.g., `SensorSpec`, `SepticTankSpec`), while the base type is `Sensor` (not `SensorSpec`). This creates a mismatch where some entities have a `Spec` class and others do not. — Ensure all entities have a corresponding `...Spec` class for their specifications, or remove the `Spec` suffix if it's not a standard pattern. (symbols: Hostel.Model.Sensor, Hostel.Model.SensorSpec, Hostel.Model.SepticTankSpec, Hostel.Model.ToiletSpec)
D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Bounded contexts not declared · ×1
  • Bounded contexts not declared — The codebase is large and highly modular, indicating distinct concerns that require explicit boundary declarations to assess cross-boundary coupling. Declare architecture.contexts (≥2) in config to assess cross-boundary type coupling.
D24 · Comment Value · misleading comment · ×1
  • misleading comment Hosts/IdentityServer.Host/Controllers/DeviceController.cs:97 — "// if the user consented to some scope, build the response model" — Verify if this still matches the code. If the code now handles multiple scopes or different logic, update or remove.
D25 · ADR Conformance · no ADRs to check · ×1
  • no ADRs to check — No ADRs found, so conformance can't be assessed.
D27 · Navigability · Navigability unmeasured · ×1
  • Navigability unmeasured — symbol resolution incomplete — 72 % of sampled invocations could not be resolved to a symbol (the workspace likely loaded without all references) — the indirection fractions would be computed over an unrepresentative slice, so navigability is reported as not measured rather than a misleading score.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan for NuGet CVEs — excluded rather than scored; re-run on an SDK that can restore this solution
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation); nothing to scan.
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines.yml, Jenkinsfile, .circleci); there is no build to attest provenance for.
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy · Not applicable · ×1
  • Not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md, .github/SECURITY.md, docs/SECURITY.md, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D7 · Architectural Integrity · No checkable ADRs to assess · ×1
  • No checkable ADRs to assess — No architecture decision records were found and the project graph is acyclic, so architectural integrity could not be assessed. Add ADRs (with `enforcement: analyzer|test`) to make the architecture's rules checkable.
D9 · Test Distribution · No tests found · ×1
  • No tests found — No test projects found in the repository.
Info — 69 finding(s)
D19 · Documentation Quality · XML-doc coverage · ×9
  • XML-doc coverage: Owner.Entity Domain/Entities/Owner.Entity/Owner.Entity.csproj — Owner.Entity: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: Notifier.Host Hosts/Notifier.Host/Notifier.Host.csproj — Notifier.Host: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: Reminder.Host Hosts/Reminder.Host/Reminder.Host.csproj — Reminder.Host: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: Owner.Host Hosts/Owner.Host/Owner.Host.csproj — Owner.Host: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: Tenant.Host Hosts/Tenant.Host/Tenant.Host.csproj — Tenant.Host: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: Tenant.State Domain/States/Tenant.State/Tenant.State.csproj — Tenant.State: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: IoT.Simulations IoT/IoT.Simulations/IoT.Simulations.csproj — IoT.Simulations: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular.csproj — Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
  • XML-doc coverage: Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular.csproj — Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular: 100 % XML-doc coverage (0/0).
D17 · Explicit Debt · Justified suppression · ×3
  • Justified suppression Hosts/SignalR.Host/Hubs/PortalHub.cs:45 — empty catch (Exception) — narrow/filtered/commented, treated as intentional
  • Justified suppression Hosts/IdentityServer.Host/Services/ProfileService.cs:45 — empty catch (Exception) — narrow/filtered/commented, treated as intentional
  • Justified suppression Hosts/IdentityServer.Host/Services/ProfileService.cs:78 — empty catch (Exception) — narrow/filtered/commented, treated as intentional
D14 · License Compliance · Licenses scanned · ×1
  • Licenses scanned — 58 packages scanned; 2 distinct SPDX licenses.
D18 · Solution Shape · Shared (Production) · ×1
  • Shared (Production) Shared/Shared.csproj — 22 .cs files, 723 LoC (637 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.Command (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.Command (Production) Domain/Commands/Owner.Command/Owner.Command.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.Command (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.Command (Production) Domain/Commands/Tenant.Command/Tenant.Command.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Command (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Command (Production) Domain/Commands/Hostel.Command/Hostel.Command.csproj — 24 .cs files, 353 LoC (298 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.Command (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.Command (Production) Domain/Commands/Reminder.Command/Reminder.Command.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.Command (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.Command (Production) Domain/Commands/Notifier.Command/Notifier.Command.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.Event (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.Event (Production) Domain/Events/Owner.Event/Owner.Event.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Event (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Event (Production) Domain/Events/Hostel.Event/Hostel.Event.csproj — 13 .cs files, 211 LoC (182 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.Event (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.Event (Production) Domain/Events/Reminder.Event/Reminder.Event.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.Event (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.Event (Production) Domain/Events/Notifier.Event/Notifier.Event.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.Event (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.Event (Production) Domain/Events/Tenant.Event/Tenant.Event.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Entity (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Entity (Production) Domain/Entities/Hostel.Entity/Hostel.Entity.csproj — 26 .cs files, 1295 LoC (1233 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.Entity (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.Entity (Production) Domain/Entities/Reminder.Entity/Reminder.Entity.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.Entity (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.Entity (Production) Domain/Entities/Notifier.Entity/Notifier.Entity.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.Entity (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.Entity (Production) Domain/Entities/Owner.Entity/Owner.Entity.csproj — 2 .cs files, 22 LoC (18 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.Entity (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.Entity (Production) Domain/Entities/Tenant.Entity/Tenant.Entity.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Model (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Model (Production) Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Hostel.Model.csproj — 10 .cs files, 392 LoC (368 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.Model (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.Model (Production) Domain/Models/Reminder.Model/Reminder.Model.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.Model (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.Model (Production) Domain/Models/Notifier.Model/Notifier.Model.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.Model (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.Model (Production) Domain/Models/Owner.Model/Owner.Model.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.Model (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.Model (Production) Domain/Models/Tenant.Model/Tenant.Model.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Query (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Query (Production) Domain/Queries/Hostel.Query/Hostel.Query.csproj — 1 .cs files, 14 LoC (12 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.Query (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.Query (Production) Domain/Queries/Reminder.Query/Reminder.Query.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.Query (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.Query (Production) Domain/Queries/Notifier.Query/Notifier.Query.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.Query (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.Query (Production) Domain/Queries/Owner.Query/Owner.Query.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.Query (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.Query (Production) Domain/Queries/Tenant.Query/Tenant.Query.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Host (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Host (Production) Hosts/Hostel.Host/Hostel.Host.csproj — 6 .cs files, 305 LoC (263 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.Host (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.Host (Production) Hosts/Notifier.Host/Notifier.Host.csproj — 1 .cs files, 13 LoC (11 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.Host (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.Host (Production) Hosts/Reminder.Host/Reminder.Host.csproj — 1 .cs files, 13 LoC (11 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.Host (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.Host (Production) Hosts/Owner.Host/Owner.Host.csproj — 1 .cs files, 13 LoC (11 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.Host (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.Host (Production) Hosts/Tenant.Host/Tenant.Host.csproj — 1 .cs files, 13 LoC (11 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.State (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.State (Production) Domain/States/Hostel.State/Hostel.State.csproj — 13 .cs files, 561 LoC (516 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.State (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.State (Production) Domain/States/Notifier.State/Notifier.State.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.State (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.State (Production) Domain/States/Owner.State/Owner.State.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.State (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.State (Production) Domain/States/Reminder.State/Reminder.State.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.State (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.State (Production) Domain/States/Tenant.State/Tenant.State.csproj — 0 .cs files, 0 LoC (0 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Repository (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Repository (Production) Domain/Repositories/Hostel.Repository/Hostel.Repository.csproj — 3 .cs files, 375 LoC (369 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Notifier.Repository (Production) · ×1
  • Notifier.Repository (Production) Domain/Repositories/Notifier.Repository/Notifier.Repository.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Owner.Repository (Production) · ×1
  • Owner.Repository (Production) Domain/Repositories/Owner.Repository/Owner.Repository.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Reminder.Repository (Production) · ×1
  • Reminder.Repository (Production) Domain/Repositories/Reminder.Repository/Reminder.Repository.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Tenant.Repository (Production) · ×1
  • Tenant.Repository (Production) Domain/Repositories/Tenant.Repository/Tenant.Repository.csproj — 1 .cs files, 9 LoC (7 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · IoT.Simulations (Production) · ×1
  • IoT.Simulations (Production) IoT/IoT.Simulations/IoT.Simulations.csproj — 1 .cs files, 13 LoC (11 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Akka.MassTransit.Logger (Production) · ×1
  • Akka.MassTransit.Logger (Production) Logger/AkkaDotNet.MassTransit.Logger/Akka.MassTransit.Logger.csproj — 2 .cs files, 197 LoC (189 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · MassTransit.Command (Production) · ×1
  • MassTransit.Command (Production) Domain/Commands/MassTransit.Command/MassTransit.Command.csproj — 1 .cs files, 24 LoC (21 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · MassTransit.Event (Production) · ×1
  • MassTransit.Event (Production) Domain/Events/MassTransit.Event/MassTransit.Event.csproj — 1 .cs files, 46 LoC (41 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console (Production) · ×1
  • Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console (Production) Logger/Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console/Akka.MassTransit.Logger.Console.csproj — 1 .cs files, 64 LoC (61 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · LogShared (Production) · ×1
  • LogShared (Production) LogShared/LogShared.csproj — 1 .cs files, 14 LoC (12 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Akka.Extension (Production) · ×1
  • Akka.Extension (Production) Extensions/Akka.Extension/Akka.Extension.csproj — 5 .cs files, 88 LoC (71 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular (Production) Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular/Hostel.Web.Landing.Angular.csproj — 0 .cs files, 0 LoC (0 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC (Production) Presentation/Web/Landing/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC/Hostel.Web.Landing.MVC.csproj — 7 .cs files, 293 LoC (258 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular (Production) Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular/Hostel.Web.Portal.Angular.csproj — 0 .cs files, 0 LoC (0 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC (Production) · ×1
  • Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC (Production) Presentation/Web/Portal/Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC/Hostel.Web.Portal.MVC.csproj — 10 .cs files, 480 LoC (426 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · SignalR.Host (Production) · ×1
  • SignalR.Host (Production) Hosts/SignalR.Host/SignalR.Host.csproj — 7 .cs files, 385 LoC (333 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · SharpNetSH (Production) · ×1
  • SharpNetSH (Production) SharpNetSH/SharpNetSH.csproj — 56 .cs files, 1726 LoC (1204 significant)
D18 · Solution Shape · IdentityServer.Host (Production) · ×1
  • IdentityServer.Host (Production) Hosts/IdentityServer.Host/IdentityServer.Host.csproj — 51 .cs files, 5467 LoC (4244 significant)
D22 · Internal API Consistency · No exposed public API · ×1
  • No exposed public API — No intentionally-exposed types (IsPackable or .Contracts) to evaluate.

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.

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaksgitleaks detect --no-banner --report-format json --report-path /dev/stdout --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrepsemgrep --config auto --json --quiet --timeout 0 --metrics off .0
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesdotnetdotnet: not applicable — the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan for NuGet CVEs — excluded rather than scored; re-run on an SDK that can restore this solution0
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivytrivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation); nothing to scan.0
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrepsemgrep: not applicable — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.0
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivytrivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** .178artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signingprovenanceprovenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, azure-pipelines.yml, Jenkinsfile, .circleci); there is no build to attest provenance for.0
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosuredisclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md, .github/SECURITY.md, docs/SECURITY.md, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0
D38 · OSV Dependency Vulnerabilitiesosv-scannerosv-scanner --format json --recursive .0artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json

Run 019ee1ea-f17d-7fd1-8801-fede7d3dbac4 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Appendix C — Personal-data map

Every field, property and record parameter whose name is conventional personal data — 4 field(s) across 3 categories, each with an exact repo-relative file:line. This is the data inventory a compliance review starts from — right-to-erasure, retention, minimisation. Detected by name with a deliberately specific classifier (the same one the GDPR dimensions use, so CardDefinition or FileName don't trip); informational — it feeds no score.

Name — 2 field(s)
  • Tenant.LastName Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Tenant/Tenant.cs:12
  • Tenant.FirstName Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Tenant/Tenant.cs:13
Email — 1 field(s)
  • Tenant.Email Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Tenant/Tenant.cs:11
Phone — 1 field(s)
  • Tenant.Phone Domain/Models/Hostel.Model/Tenant/Tenant.cs:10

Downloadable artifacts

Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif