Executive summary
eike.schumann/kafka-cqrs scores 36 out of 100, but it is rated At risk while a critical security finding is open; the score itself is unchanged.
The weakest lens counts most in the score, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 19 and is rated Critical. Its Test Coverage dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 5 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness and to resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 36 to about 49.
15 findings are critical: 13 in IaC & Container Security, one in Forms & labels and one in Static Analysis (SAST).
Watchdog couldn't measure 14 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Dependency Hygiene, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 1,284 lines, which would take an estimated 0.1 person-years, around €1,100, to rebuild.
If Production Readiness rose from 19 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 36 to about 49.
Fixed since the last survey: 2 findings
- License Compliance · Banned license: org.cassandraunit:cassandra-unit-spring
- License Compliance · Banned license: org.cassandraunit:cassandra-unit
Rebuild cost: about €1,100 · Estimate
| Cost to rebuild | €370 to €1,800, for 6 to 19 hours of work, about 0.1 person-years for one engineer |
|---|---|
| Difficulty of the problem | Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write. |
| Quality factor | ×0.7 at a score of 36. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it. |
| Size | Very small: 1,284 lines of product code |
Top priorities
Diagnosis: what the measurements show together
Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which
| uses → | 1 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.e2e_tests.utils | 2 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier | 3 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier.config | 4 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier.spring_vertx | 5 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier.verticle | 6 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister | 7 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.config | 8 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model | 9 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer | 10 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model | 11 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request | 12 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response | 13 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader | 14 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.config | 15 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.converter | 16 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model | 17 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository | 18 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses | 19 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.jdk | 20 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.json | 21 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.kafka | 22 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.tcp | 23 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.vertx | 24 web-ui.src.js.components.container.CreateDocumentContainer | 25 web-ui.src.js.components.container.DeleteDocumentContainer | 26 web-ui.src.js.components.container.NotificationsContainer | 27 web-ui.src.js.components.container.ReadDocumentContainer | 28 web-ui.src.js.components.container.UpdateDocumentContainer | 29 web-ui.src.js.components.presentational | 30 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message | 31 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository | 32 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts | 33 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller | 34 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients | 35 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service | 36 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config | 37 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message | 38 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service | 39 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler | 40 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.e2e_tests.utils | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier.config | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier.spring_vertx | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.notifier.verticle | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 6 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 7 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.config | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 8 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 9 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 10 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 11 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 14 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.config | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 15 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.converter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 16 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 17 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 18 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 19 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.jdk | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 20 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.json | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 21 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.kafka | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 22 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.tcp | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 23 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.vertx | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 24 web-ui.src.js.components.container.CreateDocumentContainer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 25 web-ui.src.js.components.container.DeleteDocumentContainer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 26 web-ui.src.js.components.container.NotificationsContainer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 27 web-ui.src.js.components.container.ReadDocumentContainer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 28 web-ui.src.js.components.container.UpdateDocumentContainer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 29 web-ui.src.js.components.presentational | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 30 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 31 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 32 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 33 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 34 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 35 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service | 2 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 36 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 37 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message | 2 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 38 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 39 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler | 2 | 1 | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 40 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
30→8 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message.Message→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model.Document
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
31→8 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository.DocumentRepository→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model.Document
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.model.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
32→10 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.Message→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model.Document
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
33→16 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model.Document
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.model.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
33→17 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository.DocumentRepository
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.repository.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.reader.controller uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
34→18 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses✕
- Connections
- 3 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients.NotifierClient→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses.SseResponsepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients.ProducerClient→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses.JsonResponsepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients.ReaderClient→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses.JsonResponse
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.responses.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.test_utils.http.clients uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
35→30 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message✕
- Connections
- 2 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service.KafkaListenerService→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message.Messagepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service.PersistenceService→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message.Message
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.message.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
35→31 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service.PersistenceService→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository.DocumentRepository
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.repository.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.persister.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
36→32 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config.KafkaConfig→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.Message
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.config uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
37→10 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model✕
- Connections
- 2 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.CreateMessage→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model.Documentpl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.UpdateMessage→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model.Document
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.model.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
37→32 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts✕
- Connections
- 3 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.CreateMessage→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.Messagepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.DeleteMessage→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.Messagepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.UpdateMessage→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.Message
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
38→32 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service.SenderService→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.Message
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.parts.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
39→11 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request✕
- Connections
- 2 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.MessageAssembler→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.CreateRequestpl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.MessageAssembler→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.UpdateRequest
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
39→12 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.ResponseAssembler→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response.CreateResponse
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
39→37 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message✕
- Connections
- 3 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.MessageAssembler→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.CreateMessagepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.MessageAssembler→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.DeleteMessagepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.MessageAssembler→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.UpdateMessage
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.message.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
40→11 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request✕
- Connections
- 2 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.CreateRequestpl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.UpdateRequest
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.request.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
40→12 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response.CreateResponse
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.response.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
40→38 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service✕
- Connections
- 2 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service.IdServicepl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service.SenderService
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.service.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
40→39 pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler✕
- Connections
- 2 pairs of types, where a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a type in pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.
- The types involved
pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.MessageAssemblerpl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller.DocumentController→pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.ResponseAssembler
- Direction
- pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler, so a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler can break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller, while a change to pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller can't break pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.assembler.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: pl.jojczykp.kafka_cqrs.producer.controller uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
At a glance — Code Health
At a glance — Architecture
At a glance — Maturity
At a glance — Readiness
At a glance — Security
At a glance — Accessibility
Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping
| OWASP category | Findings | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration | 23 | High / Critical |
| A05:2025 — Injection | 3 | High / Critical |
| A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures | 1 | Medium |
| A08:2025 — Software or Data Integrity Failures | 1 | Medium |
Roadmap
Establish a CI pipeline that builds on every push and enforces security checks via SAST tools to prevent regressions. Implement a test runner, linter, and type checker as standard scripts, then immediately add tests for all unreached production modules to achieve baseline coverage. Finally, resolve the five orphaned files, starting with KafkaTopicInjector, DocumentController, and ProducerClient, to ensure codebase freshness.
| Do this | Helps | Effort | Dimension |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resolve the 5 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with KafkaTopicInjector.java, DocumentController.java, ProducerClient.java. | +2.8 pts | Low | Knowledge Freshness |
| Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. | +2.6 pts | Low | ADR Quality |
| Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR. | +4.2 pts | Medium | CI/CD gates |
| Run what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing. | +4.2 pts | Medium | Security & performance tooling |
| Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry). | +4.2 pts | Medium | Test Coverage |
| Add a test runner (vitest / jest / playwright) and eslint and type checking (adopt TypeScript, or type-check the existing JavaScript with `checkJs`) as package.json scripts and run them in CI. | +4.2 pts | Medium | Tooling |
| Resolve the 2 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md (2). | +1.0 pts | Low | Documentation Quality |
| Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them. | +2.0 pts | Medium | Architecture documentation |
File quality
| File | Score | Band | Worst signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| REDACTED | 0.0 | Slop | IaC & Container Security: Critical IaC: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 3.7 | Slop | IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 3.7 | Slop | IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 3.7 | Slop | IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 3.7 | Slop | IaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 7.2 | Mixed | Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED |
| reader-service/build.gradle | 7.9 | Mixed | Platform End-of-Life: End-of-life framework: Spring Boot 2 |
| notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/config/KafkaConfig.java | 8.5 | Near-clean | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) |
| web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx | 8.5 | Near-clean | Change Coupling: Change coupling clique: CreateDocumentContainer.jsx, DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx, ReadDocumentContainer.jsx, UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx |
| README.md | 9.3 | Near-clean | Documentation Quality: Documentation: no architecture or design documentation |
How the grades work
A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here tends to cause failures elsewhere.
Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to carry for two years either.
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions. Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Something this survey could not settle from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each one is named under Limitations.
Methodology & how to trust this report
Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 69 of 72 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 0.8 — 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.
What we checked — 72 dimensions across the health lenses
- 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, 55 of 70 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line.
- Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
- Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.
Tools & methods
| Method | Backs | Version | Evaluator |
|---|---|---|---|
| Roslyn static analysis | Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering | 5.3.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| Native secret scanner | Hardcoded secrets / credentials | 1.0.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| Watchdog duplication detector (in-process) | Code duplication | 1.0.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage) | Line & branch coverage | 10.0.400 | ✓ deterministic |
| NuGet / dotnet | Outdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies | 10.0.400 | ✓ deterministic |
| git / LibGit2Sharp | Churn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history | 2.43.0 · 0.31.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkov | Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR | 1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533 | ✓ deterministic |
| LLM (sampled · advisory) | Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurement | Local LLM | ◐ LLM · sampled · advisory |
Run transparency — what happened this run
- D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.java) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
- D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.java) and this repository declares a JVM test suite (repository root, Gradle), but it was not re-run: no test result was produced. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 7 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 49 dependency(ies) and leaving 0 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
- D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable (1 contributor(s) across 111 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). Concentration needs a team to concentrate: with one contributor there is nobody to spread the knowledge to, so there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
- D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is an ADMISSION gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (web-ui/package.json), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here. D22 DOES collect the public API of every language in this tree, and admits a project only when its manifest makes that ecosystem's publication act in a form the marker recognises — so what is missing is not a collector but an admission rule for the publication act this repository makes, if it makes one. The remedy is a better discriminator for that marker — not a collector, and no change to the scan image can close it. The marker's rules are measured to refuse applications, so one refused repository is the rule working as calibrated; several are the evidence that it is too strict. For npm the surface is what a published package.json's entry points (exports, main, module, types) export, followed through the source; an entry that names build output the tree does not commit (dist/, build/) is not followed back to source, because only a tsconfig outDir/rootDir pair states that mapping and a bundler's input lives in executable configuration this engine does not evaluate.
- D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
- D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — measured, with a gap in what it reached — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) (npm) WERE scanned and every vulnerability they reported is included in this result; REDACTED was not, so this dimension's score covers less than the dependency surface this repository declares, and nothing here is evidence that REDACTED is free of known-vulnerable dependencies.
- D43 Malicious Dependencies — measured, with a gap in what it reached — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) (npm) WERE scanned and every vulnerability they reported is included in this result; REDACTED was not, so this dimension's score covers less than the dependency surface this repository declares, and nothing here is evidence that REDACTED is free of known-vulnerable dependencies.
- AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via REDACTED (REDACTED). docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped.
- C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
- C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
- C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
- C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
- C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
- GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and this repository's Java is most of its product and is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
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
- D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
- D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
- D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
- D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
- D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
- D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
- D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
- D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
- D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
- D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
- D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
- D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
- D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
- D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
- D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
- D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
- D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
- D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
- D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
- D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
- D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a REDACTED (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
- AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
- AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
- 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
Dimensions
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity
0 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity
0 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15.
D3 · God Classes
0 god class(es) detected.
D4 · Code Duplication
1 duplicated block group(s) detected.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with KafkaConfig.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Duplication in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
D5 · Coupling
8 production modules (Gradle+npm), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; edges a convention plugin adds from buildSrc or build-logic are not visible there; 0 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 5 of the 8 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, declare types in source no model reads, or have no source directory of their own).
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)
0 of 14 classes have LCOM4 above 3.
D13 · Secret Scanning
Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.
D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots
No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.
D17 · Explicit Debt
0 deducted task-comment markers across 1284 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.
D19 · Documentation Quality
The repository's root README is a single cohesive document covering the project (Event Sourcing CQRS microservices with SSE Web Push on top of Kubernetes, Kafka, and Cassandra), prerequisites (JDK11, Kubernetes/minikube/Docker/npm 6.4.1), an unactionable TODO list, references to deployment guides, and run steps for building Cassandra, starting Minikube, and deploying the application. It is well written but thin on concrete usage examples and lacks a dedicated architecture or contribution guide; it also does not state what the project does beyond its title.
What to do
- Resolve the 2 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).
D20 · ADR Quality
No architecture decision records were found.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
D21 · Naming Consistency
0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.
D26 · Project Cohesion
0 of 5 build units (Gradle, npm) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.
D28 · Secrets (history)
gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)
3 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 2 medium, 0 low.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
- Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities
No known-vulnerable dependencies in the 1 ecosystem(s) that were scanned (npm). Partial dependency scan: 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) were scanned (npm), and the findings above are real and complete for them. REDACTED was not scanned (REDACTED: the scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned), so this is not the whole dependency surface and the result is reported at reduced confidence.
D31 · IaC & Container Security
23 finding(s): 2 critical, 11 high, 5 medium, 5 low.
What to do
- Resolve the 11 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (8), REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 issue-level).
- Resolve the 2 Critical IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
- Resolve the 5 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (4), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
D34 · Knowledge Freshness
5 of 5 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is test-utils/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/test_utils/kafka/KafkaTopicInjector.java. Counted over 5 of the 59 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What to do
- Resolve the 5 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with KafkaTopicInjector.java, DocumentController.java, ProducerClient.java. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 recommendation-level).
- Resolve the 1 Orphaned files with no living knowledge finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
D35 · Change Coupling
Strongest change-coupling: CreateDocumentContainer.jsx↔DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx 100%; CreateDocumentContainer.jsx↔ReadDocumentContainer.jsx 100%; CreateDocumentContainer.jsx↔UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx 100%
What to do
- Resolve the 1 Change coupling clique finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with CreateDocumentContainer.jsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
D43 · Malicious Dependencies
No known-vulnerable dependencies in the 1 ecosystem(s) that were scanned (npm). Partial dependency scan: 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) were scanned (npm), and the findings above are real and complete for them. REDACTED was not scanned (REDACTED: the scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned), so this is not the whole dependency surface and the result is reported at reduced confidence.
D44 · Platform End-of-Life
0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 1 end-of-life framework(s), read from 6 platform declaration(s) and 49 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 End-of-life framework finding(s) in Platform End-of-Life — start with build.gradle. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions
AC2 · Forms & labels
- This control has no associated label. Add a <label htmlFor> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it. — web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/OutputNotifications.jsx:6
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 structure
- No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. — web-ui/src/index.html: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.
AC7 · A11y enforcement
- No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 16 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
What to do
- Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
AX1 · Captive dependencies
AX10 · Code composition
What to do
- The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
AX2 · Stateful singletons
- `DocumentRepository` is a singleton (@Repository: the container shares one instance across every request thread) but mutates instance state outside any lock (deleteStatement, upsertStatement; e.g. `deleteStatement` in `delete` at line 74). — persister-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/persister/repository/DocumentRepository.java:21
- `WebNotifierVerticle` is a singleton (@Component: the container shares one instance across every request thread) but mutates instance state outside any lock (server; e.g. `server` in `start` at line 26). — notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/verticle/WebNotifierVerticle.java:18
What to do
- Java/Kotlin: keep container singletons stateless — move per-request data into locals or a request-scoped bean — or back the state with java.util.concurrent types (ConcurrentHashMap, AtomicInteger/AtomicReference), guard it with synchronized / a Lock (Kotlin: withLock), or mark a flag that is only ever overwritten volatile (@Volatile).
AX3 · Project dependency cycles
AX4 · Dependency direction
AX6 · Interface segregation
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs
M1 · Documentation (README)
What to do
- Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
- Add a README to the 7 of 7 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation
- No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
- No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
What to do
- Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
- Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure
M4 · Documentation accuracy
- README advertises a microservices architecture, but the repo is a single project with no service manifests — searched for: `microservice`, `service-mesh`, `istio`. Each was matched case- and separator-insensitively against file and directory NAMES anywhere in the tree, and against the CONTENTS of manifest and configuration files (package.json and other *.json, *.csproj, *.props, *.sln/*.slnx, *.yml, *.toml, *.config, tool configs such as eslint.config.js, REDACTED); the README's own prose never counts, so a claim is never refuted by merely being made. Nothing outside that search was read — a footprint living only in a submodule, in a file type not listed here, or under a name none of those terms matches is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — README.md:1
What to do
- Reconcile the README with reality: README advertises a microservices architecture, but the repo is a single project with no service manifests.
P1 · CI/CD gates
- 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.
P10 · Library API & versioning
P2 · Observability
- Only 3/4 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `reader-service`.
What to do
- Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
- Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-java or Micrometer) and a health-check endpoint (Spring Boot Actuator's /actuator/health, or a /health route) for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling
- No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add spotbugs with find-sec-bugs (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
What to do
- Run what this repository's stack ships: spotbugs with find-sec-bugs — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
- Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
- Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback
What to do
- Nothing pauses a release for a human: publish as a draft release (or gate the release job on a protected tag/manual dispatch) so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.
R1 · Type Safety
- 0 typed · 16 plain JS — the untyped files are web-ui/src/index.js, web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx, web-ui/src/js/components/container/DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx, web-ui/src/js/components/container/NotificationsContainer.jsx, web-ui/src/js/components/container/ReadDocumentContainer.jsx, web-ui/src/js/components/container/UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx (+10 more).
What to do
- Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
R10 · Code Duplication
- web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx:69 · web-ui/src/js/components/container/UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx:64 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx:69
- web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx:11 · web-ui/src/js/components/container/UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx:11 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 193 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx:11
- web-ui/src/js/components/container/ReadDocumentContainer.jsx:41 · web-ui/src/js/components/container/UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx:56 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — web-ui/src/js/components/container/ReadDocumentContainer.jsx:41
- web-ui/src/js/components/container/DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx:9 · web-ui/src/js/components/container/ReadDocumentContainer.jsx:11 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and each CITED SPAN is a SPECIALISATION DECLARATION — a type whose `extends` clause names a base and whose body hands that base its own values through `super(…)`. The shared module this dimension usually asks you to extract already exists: it is that base, every one of these sites already reaches it, and the `super(…)` call this row matched on is where each site passes its differences in. So do not read this as an extract-a-helper row — there is no missing helper, and what is left at each site is the declaration of one distinct specialisation, which cannot be deleted without deleting the thing it declares. Read what actually differs between the spans, because two different answers follow. Where the sites differ only in the values they hand the base — a type argument, a service, an alias, a cache — the repetition is a TEMPLATE, and the only moves that collapse it are to generate these declarations from the set they enumerate or to replace the repeated construction with one factory each site calls with its own values; where that set is the point, each site pinning one distinct thing, the repetition IS the enumeration and there is nothing to remove. Where instead a span carries logic OUTSIDE the delegation that is the same at every site, that logic is the part to move, and its home is the base type rather than a new module. Reported because the copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. — web-ui/src/js/components/container/DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx:9
- web-ui/src/js/components/container/DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx:35 · web-ui/src/js/components/container/ReadDocumentContainer.jsx:42 · web-ui/src/js/components/container/UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx:57 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — web-ui/src/js/components/container/DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx:35
- web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:6 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputButton.jsx:5 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputId.jsx:6 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:6
- web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:9 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputButton.jsx:8 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputId.jsx:9 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputText.jsx:8 — the 4 copies are spread across 4 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:9
- web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:4 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputId.jsx:4 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:4
- web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/OutputRequest.jsx:4 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/OutputResponse.jsx:4 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/OutputRequest.jsx:4
- web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:1 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputId.jsx:1 · web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/OutputAuthor.jsx:1 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:1
What to do
- Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity
R3 · Large Files
R4 · Test Coverage
- 0% of 16 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count
What to do
- Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).
R6 · Tooling
- test ✗ · lint ✗ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.
What to do
- Add a test runner (vitest / jest / playwright) and eslint and type checking (adopt TypeScript, or type-check the existing JavaScript with `checkJs`) as package.json scripts and run them in CI.
R7 · Dead Code
R8 · Dependency Hygiene
R9 · Circular Imports
X1 · Async correctness
X12 · Unreachable branch
X13 · Undrained process stream
X14 · Bypassable address classification
X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader
X16 · Unfloored truncation loop
X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness
X19 · Unrestored process-global state
X20 · Mistyped argument guard
X21 · Side-effecting pattern guard
X22 · Contradicted release guard
X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation
X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped
X25 · Inert configuration knob
X26 · Unsynchronised callback handoff
X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated
X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard
X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element
X3 · Exception handling
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects
X4 · Structured logging
- `info` at line 30 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string concatenated with a value, or `String.format` — through SLF4J or log4j 2, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.info("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or `log.atInfo().addKeyValue("order_id", orderId).log("order moved")` with SLF4J 2's fluent API. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text. — notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/spring_vertx/VerticleDeployer.java:30
- `info` at line 53 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string concatenated with a value, or `String.format` — through SLF4J or log4j 2, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.info("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or `log.atInfo().addKeyValue("order_id", orderId).log("order moved")` with SLF4J 2's fluent API. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text. — notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/spring_vertx/VerticleDeployer.java:53
- `info` at line 27 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string concatenated with a value, or `String.format` — through SLF4J or log4j 2, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.info("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or `log.atInfo().addKeyValue("order_id", orderId).log("order moved")` with SLF4J 2's fluent API. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text. — notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/verticle/WebNotifierVerticle.java:27
- `debug` at line 29 is handed a message assembled at the call — a string concatenated with a value, or `String.format` — through SLF4J or log4j 2, so the logger receives one finished string: the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the level is filtered out. Pass a constant pattern and the values beside it instead: `log.debug("Order {} moved to {}", orderId, status)`, which keeps the pattern and its arguments apart on the event for a structured encoder (logstash-logback-encoder, log4j 2's JsonTemplateLayout, OpenTelemetry), or `log.atInfo().addKeyValue("order_id", orderId).log("order moved")` with SLF4J 2's fluent API. An exception goes last, as the throwable argument, not into the text. — producer-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/producer/service/SenderService.java:29
What to do
- Interpolated log message defeats structured logging
X5 · Nullable reference types
- 0/26 of this repository's Java package directories are under a non-null default: a `package-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked` (JSpecify) or `@NonNullApi`, `@ParametersAreNonnullByDefault`, `@NonNullByDefault`, `@DefaultQualifier(NonNull.class)`; a `module-info.java` declaring `@NullMarked`; every type in it `@NullMarked`; or a build that runs NullAway with the package in `AnnotatedPackages`, or the Checker Framework's `NullnessChecker`. Elsewhere every reference admits null and no checker warns on the dereference that throws a `NullPointerException`.
What to do
- Declare the default where Java declares it: `@NullMarked` (org.jspecify.annotations) in each package's `package-info.java`, or once in `module-info.java`, and run NullAway (Error Prone) or the Checker Framework so the declaration is enforced. Then annotate the real exceptions `@Nullable` and resolve the suppressions rather than adding to them: a `@SuppressWarnings("NullAway")` or `castToNonNull(x)` on a value the checker could show to be null is a `NullPointerException` waiting for the path that makes it true — where the value genuinely cannot be null, say something the checker can see instead (a null check, `Objects.requireNonNull`, a non-null field initialised in the constructor).
WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed
| Dimension | WCAG 2.2 A/AA criteria | Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| AC2 · Forms & labels | 1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2 | Partial signal |
| AC3 · Page structure | 1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2 | Partial signal |
| AC7 · A11y enforcement | enforcement — no page criterion | Enforcement posture (process) |
Reference — by lens
| Lens | Score | Rating | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Code Health | 44% | Weak — gated by R1, R10, X5 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Architecture | 81% | Strong | Solid. |
| Maturity | 47% | Weak — gated by D34, M2 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Readiness | 19% | Critical — gated by R4, R6, P1, P3 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Security | 81% | Strong | Strongest area. |
| Accessibility | 46% | Weak | Below par — needs attention. |
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
- SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Not evidenced — 5 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
- C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
- P6 Release Hygiene — not evidenced — no changelog, version stamp or semver release tag in the repo
Not included — 54 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
- AC1 Text alternatives — No image/media element found in the parsed markup — AC1 not applicable here.
- AC4 Keyboard semantics — No interactive element found in the parsed markup — AC4 not applicable here.
- AC5 ARIA correctness — No ARIA usage found in the parsed markup — AC5 not applicable here.
- AC6 Visual & motion safety — No styled element found in the parsed markup — AC6 not applicable here.
- AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
- AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
- AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
- AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- AXR1 Runtime accessibility — docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
- C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- D10 Test Quality — ~15 lines of test source are present (.java) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
- D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — the .java suite was found but not re-run
- D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 7 Maven/Gradle manifest(s) were read, stating a version for 49 dependency(ies) and leaving 0 to a parent or an imported BOM, but no build resolved the dependency graph, so the outdated signal was not established. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
- D14 License Compliance — Not scored — this repository's 49 declared JVM dependency coordinate(s) were read from its 7 Maven/Gradle manifest(s), but Maven Central could not be asked for the licence of 22 of them (HTTP 429 Too Many Requests from https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/junit/junit/4.12/junit-4.12.pom), and a licence verdict over part of a dependency graph is not a licence verdict. Nothing is asserted about this repository's licensing in either direction.
- D16 Bus Factor — single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable
- D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
- D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
- D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
- D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
- D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
- D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.java), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
- D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
- D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
- D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
- D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
- D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
- D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
- D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.java) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so its unit/integration/BDD/E2E split couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
- DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
- ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
- ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
- ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
- GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
- P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — no outbound HTTP usage detected — no HTTP client call or construction in the JVM, JavaScript/TypeScript source (service entry point: notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/NotifierServiceMain.java:6 (@SpringBootApplication))
- P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
- P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (JaCoCo XML — the Gradle `jacocoTestReport` task) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
- PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `@Benchmark` in a Java, Kotlin or Scala file importing JMH or kotlinx-benchmark, Jetpack Benchmark's `measureRepeated` in a file importing androidx.benchmark, or JMH/kotlinx-benchmark/androidx.benchmark in a pom.xml, Gradle or sbt build, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
- PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Java code has 1,103 production line(s), 0 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
- PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: this repository declares no async functions, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
- R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
- R5 Dependency Freshness — no package-lock.json — dependency freshness not measured (would require an npm lockfile); JS/npm CVEs are scored in D30 (Dependency Vulnerabilities), which answers every ecosystem
- S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Java was read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Java request off Android takes no token: it is cancelled through the handle it returns (Future.cancel, Call.cancel, a Disposable), ambiently (io.grpc.Context) or by interrupting its thread, not through a parameter
- X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
Critical — 15 finding(s)
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- <textarea> without a programmatic label web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/OutputNotifications.jsx:6
- REDACTED
Serious — 29 finding(s)
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- Stateful singleton: DocumentRepository persister-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/persister/repository/DocumentRepository.java:21
- Stateful singleton: WebNotifierVerticle notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/verticle/WebNotifierVerticle.java:18
- Duplicated block (17 lines × 3 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/container/DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx:35
- Duplicated block (17 lines × 3 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:6
- Page without a main landmark web-ui/src/index.html:2
- Accessibility enforcement below the top rung
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- Change coupling clique: CreateDocumentContainer.jsx, DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx, ReadDocumentContainer.jsx, UpdateDocumentContainer.jsx web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx
- Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/config/KafkaConfig.java:27
- End-of-life framework: Spring Boot 2 reader-service/build.gradle:1
- No CI pipeline
- Type Safety
- Duplicated block (48 lines × 2 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx:69
- Duplicated block with local edits (29 matched lines × 2 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/container/CreateDocumentContainer.jsx:11
- Duplicated block (28 lines × 2 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/container/ReadDocumentContainer.jsx:41
- Duplicated block (18 lines × 2 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/container/DeleteDocumentContainer.jsx:9
- Duplicated block (14 lines × 4 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:9
- Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:4
- Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/OutputRequest.jsx:4
- Duplicated block (11 lines × 3 locations) web-ui/src/js/components/presentational/InputAuthor.jsx:1
- Test Coverage
- No test, lint or typecheck script
- JavaScript dependencies are not locked
Minor — 26 finding(s)
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- Orphaned file test-utils/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/test_utils/kafka/KafkaTopicInjector.java:1
- Orphaned file producer-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/producer/controller/DocumentController.java:1
- Orphaned file test-utils/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/test_utils/http/clients/ProducerClient.java:1
- Orphaned file notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/verticle/WebNotifierVerticle.java:1
- Orphaned file persister-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/persister/repository/DocumentRepository.java:1
- Interpolated log message defeats structured logging notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/spring_vertx/VerticleDeployer.java:30
- Interpolated log message defeats structured logging notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/spring_vertx/VerticleDeployer.java:53
- Interpolated log message defeats structured logging notifier-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/notifier/verticle/WebNotifierVerticle.java:27
- Interpolated log message defeats structured logging producer-service/src/main/java/pl/jojczykp/kafka_cqrs/producer/service/SenderService.java:29
- Documentation: no architecture or design documentation README.md
- Documentation: no usage examples README.md
- No ADRs found
- REDACTED
- Orphaned files with no living knowledge
- REDACTED
- No ADRs
- No architecture diagram/doc
- README/code drift README.md:1
- Logging is not universal
- No SAST
- Java packages are not null-marked everywhere
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
| Dimension | Tool | Version | Command | Findings | Raw output |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D28 · Secrets (history) | gitleaks | — | gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-10cd6245307b49b3ab848e6472c53b0d/history.json --exit-code 0 --source . | 0 | artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json |
| D28 · Secrets (history) | gitleaks | — | gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-10cd6245307b49b3ab848e6472c53b0d/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source . | 0 | artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json |
| D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) | semgrep | — | semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off . | 3 | artifacts/raw/semgrep.json |
| D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities | osv-scanner | — | osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm . | 0 | — |
| D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities | trivy | — | trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update | 0 | artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json |
| D31 · IaC & Container Security | trivy | — | trivy config --format json --quiet . | 23 | artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json |
| D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) | semgrep | — | semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. | 0 | — |
| D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing | provenance | — | provenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for. | 0 | — |
| D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy | disclosure | — | disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed. | 0 | — |
| D40 · Network Egress Confinement | runtime-hardening | — | runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here. | 0 | — |
| D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement | runtime-hardening | — | runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here. | 0 | — |
| D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement | runtime-hardening | — | runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here. | 0 | — |
| D43 · Malicious Dependencies | osv-scanner | — | osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm . | 0 | — |
| D43 · Malicious Dependencies | trivy | — | trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update | 0 | artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json |