Public report — food-delivery-modular-monolith, published 29 Jun 2026. Concrete security findings (CVE IDs, secret matches, dependency versions) are hidden in this version; ask the repo owner for the full report.
Watchdog 29-06-2026 @ 21:35 UTC Public
Code Health Audit

Mehdihadeli/food-Delivery-Modular-Monolith

No regression coverage not measured
43% Weak
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
upper third — near Adequate

Medium · 22,201 LoC · 27 projects · rebuild ~0.2 person-years · weakest lens: Security (37%)

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

70/73dimensions tool-verifieddeterministic · confidence 1.0 · 3 LLM-assisted, advisory
63findings with an exact file:lineof 200 — the remainder are repo-wide signals (a dimension-level measurement, not a single line); open any file:line and verify
73/103dimensions across the health lenses22201 LoC · 27 projects — wide & deep

Executive summary

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

mehdihadeli/food-delivery-modular-monolith carries serious risk (43%). Several issues below can materially affect reliability, security, or the cost of change and warrant near-term attention.

The area that most needs attention is Security (37%) — exposure to security and compliance incidents is elevated. Readiness (38%) is the next concern — operating, monitoring and recovering the system safely is harder.

Leadership focus, highest impact first: Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection /… (Data Protection); Set RequireHttpsMetadata = true in prod (or pin MetadataAddress… (Web-Security Posture); Back the audit convention with a structural mechanism (Audit Trail).

For scale: Medium (~22,201 production lines); rebuilding it from scratch would take roughly ~0.2 person-years (~1 engineer). Approximate, ±~30%.

How the score is built — each lens's share of the headline Width is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.
Security 37% · 45% weightReadiness 38% · 25% weightDomain Modelling 51% · 14% weightMaturity 52% · 8% weightPerformance 64% · 4% weightArchitecture 67% · 2% weightCode Health 79% · 1% weightEvent-Driven 83% · 1% weight

Raise Security 37 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 43 → ~48.

Code composition — where the lines go
Business logic 15%Plumbing 69%Tests 6%Generated 10%
Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €11,000–€56,000
Cost to rebuild€11,000–€56,000 (0.1–0.4 person-years (186–589 h), ~1 engineer)
Domain complexityVery high — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor0.7× (at 43% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shapeMedium · 46% boilerplate · 36% straight-line · 18% branching logic

This codebase represents roughly ~0.2 person-years of build effort (about ~€34,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Security at 37% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Very high (×1.8) — service/app, DDD/clean architecture, CQRS, domain model, event-driven integration × a 0.7× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30%. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

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

1
Resolve the 7 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.
+5.0 pts · Low effort · Dependency Hygiene
2
Resolve the 4 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.
+4.7 pts · Low effort · Dependency Hygiene
3
Resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with UnitTest1.cs (2).
+4.4 pts · Low effort · Test Quality

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Value concentrated against a weak lens · High · Value at risk
This is a Medium asset (~0.2 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Security at 37%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.
Evidence: valuation: Medium, ~0.2 person-years rebuild (22,201 LoC) · weakest lens: Security 37%
→ Direct remediation budget at Security first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.
Root cause: an un-encapsulated domain · Medium · Root cause
13 findings across public setters, anemic types and primitive ids share one root cause — the domain layer doesn't protect its own invariants. Fixing the encapsulation pattern resolves them together, rather than chasing each finding.
Evidence: DM5 setters: 1 · DM4 anemic: 4 · DM2 primitive ids: 8
→ Address encapsulation as one pattern (private setters + behaviour + strongly-typed ids), not 100 separate findings.
Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage
Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.). The rest can wait behind it.
Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort
→ Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
Improving trajectory · Info · Trajectory
The headline is improving steadily (+5.6 pts/run over 5 runs) — whatever you're doing is working; keep the gate.
Evidence: trajectory: +5.6 pts/run over 5 runs

Trajectory

Where this codebase is heading — something a one-shot snapshot cannot show. 43, unchanged across 5 runs.

025507510029 Junnow
OverallCode HealthArchitectureMaturityReadinessSecurityDomain ModellingEvent-DrivenPerformance

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

arch BuildingBlocks.Abstractions Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory InMemory BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Core Core BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Core->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Email Email BuildingBlocks.Email->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Email->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Integration.Hangfire Hangfire BuildingBlocks.Integration.Hangfire->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Integration.Hangfire->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Logging Logging BuildingBlocks.Logging->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Logging->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Monitoring Monitoring BuildingBlocks.Monitoring->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Monitoring->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Persistence.EfCore.Postgres Postgres BuildingBlocks.Persistence.EfCore.Postgres->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo Mongo BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Resiliency Resiliency BuildingBlocks.Resiliency->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Resiliency->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Security Security BuildingBlocks.Security->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Security->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Swagger Swagger BuildingBlocks.Swagger->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Swagger->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Validation Validation BuildingBlocks.Validation->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Validation->BuildingBlocks.Core BuildingBlocks.Web Web BuildingBlocks.Web->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions BuildingBlocks.Web->BuildingBlocks.Core FoodDelivery.Api Api FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs Catalogs FoodDelivery.Api->FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers Customers FoodDelivery.Api->FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity Identity FoodDelivery.Api->FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders Orders FoodDelivery.Api->FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Core FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Email FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Logging FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Monitoring FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.EfCore.Postgres FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Resiliency FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Security FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Swagger FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Validation FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs->BuildingBlocks.Web FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Core FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Email FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Logging FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Monitoring FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.EfCore.Postgres FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Resiliency FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Security FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Swagger FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Validation FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers->BuildingBlocks.Web FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Abstractions FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Core FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Email FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Logging FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Monitoring FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.EfCore.Postgres FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Resiliency FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Security FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Swagger FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Validation FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity->BuildingBlocks.Web FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Core FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Email FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Logging FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Monitoring FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.EfCore.Postgres FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Resiliency FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Security FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Swagger FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Validation FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders->BuildingBlocks.Web

At a glance — Code Health · 79% · Strong

At a glance — Architecture · 67% · Adequate · gated by AX8

At a glance — Maturity · 52% · Adequate · gated by D34, M2

At a glance — Readiness · 38% · Weak · gated by D12, P5

At a glance — Security · 37% · Weak · gated by D28, D36, C1

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 51% · Adequate · gated by DM2

At a glance — Event-Driven · 83% · Strong

At a glance — Performance · 64% · Adequate

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures15High / Critical
A05:2021 — Security Misconfiguration3High / Critical

Roadmap

First, encrypt sensitive data at rest and manage keys securely, while ensuring HTTPS metadata is strictly required in production. Next, implement a structural audit trail using an EF SaveChanges interceptor to log all sensitive changes immutably. Then, resolve the seven deprecated dependencies to improve hygiene. Finally, codify backups and geo-recovery in infrastructure as code, documenting RTO/RPO and restore procedures to ensure true disaster recovery.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Resolve the 7 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.+5.0 ptsLowDependency Hygiene
Resolve the 4 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.+4.7 ptsLowDependency Hygiene
Resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with UnitTest1.cs (2).+4.4 ptsLowTest Quality
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).+5.2 ptsMediumData Protection
Set RequireHttpsMetadata = true in prod (or pin MetadataAddress to a localhost URL the API can hit directly).+5.1 ptsMediumWeb-Security Posture
Back the audit convention with a structural mechanism: an EF SaveChanges interceptor (or equivalent) writing every sensitive change to an immutable audit log, and apply [Audited] to the entities that need a who-changed-what trail.+5.1 ptsMediumAudit Trail
Codify backups + geo-recovery in IaC and document RTO/RPO and the restore procedure — a persistence guard alone is not disaster recovery.+5.0 ptsMediumDR & Backup
Add readiness/liveness probes and a rolling-update (or blue/green) strategy so a bad release is caught and rolled back automatically.+4.5 ptsMediumDeployment & Rollback

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 46 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 0% slop · 39% mixed · 61% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
.devcontainer/Dockerfile4.4MixedIaC & Container Security: High IaC: DS-0002
src/Modules/Identity/ECommerce.Modules.Identity/identity.appsettings.json5.8MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Api/ECommerce.Api/appsettings.docker.json5.8MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Api/ECommerce.Api/appsettings.json5.8MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs6.0MixedExplicit Debt: Dead code: GetImplementedInterfacesToMap
src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs6.0MixedExplicit Debt: Dead code: GenericParametersMatch
tests/building-blocks/Core/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests/BusPublishTests.cs6.5MixedExplicit Debt: CommentedOutCode
src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Persistence/EfCore/EfDbContextBase.cs6.7MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/IdentityModuleConfiguration.cs6.7MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/Api/FoodDelivery.Api/appsettings.json7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Api/FoodDelivery.Api/appsettings.docker.json7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Api/FoodDelivery.Api/tempkey.jwk7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/identity.appsettings.json7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Modules/Catalogs/ECommerce.Modules.Catalogs/catalogs.appsettings.json7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Modules/Customers/ECommerce.Modules.Customers/customers.appsettings.json7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Modules/Orders/ECommerce.Modules.Orders/orders.appsettings.json7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/Api/ECommerce.Api/tempkey.jwk7.2MixedSecrets (history): Secret: generic-api-key
src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/Broker/InMemory/InMemoryBus.cs7.8MixedCognitive Complexity: InMemoryBus.ReceivingMessages (cognitive 16)
tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests/UnitTest1.cs8.0Near-cleanTest Quality: No assertions (empty test): Test1
tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.UnitTests/UnitTest1.cs8.0Near-cleanTest Quality: No assertions (empty test): Test1

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. 70 of 73 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.7 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 73 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D10D12D13D14D15D16D17D18D20D21D23D24D26D27D28D29D31D34D35D36AX1AX10AX2AX3AX4AX5AX6AX7AX8AX9C1C2C3DM1DM2DM3DM4DM5DM6DM8ED1ED3ED4ED5GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P5P7P8PF1PF2PF3S1X1X2X3X4X5

Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.

How to trust any code-health report — three questions
  1. Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 63 of 200 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
  2. Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
  3. Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 019f154e-b60f-730f-b109-bb35f6697719.

The exact command behind every deep-scan dimension — tool, version, invocation and retained raw output — is in Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail.

Run transparency — what happened this run

What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.

  • D19 Documentation Quality — LLM provider failed — The model provider returned an unusable result, so this LLM-assisted dimension fell back to a measurement gap (confidence 0) rather than a penalty. Re-run with a reachable provider to score it.
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.
  • D38 OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — scanner not present in this environment — The backing tool was not installed where this scan ran, so this dimension was not scored. Install the tool (or run in the hosted environment, where it is always present) for a graded result.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity (jscpd) — it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (EF migration scaffolds, *.Designer.cs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only; the generated footprint is reported separately under Solution Shape.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (EF migrations, designer files, snapshots) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
  • 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.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling: Boundary leakage is detected from type references across detected contexts — leaks that flow through primitives, serialization or shared infrastructure may not surface as a typed reference.
  • D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
  • 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").
  • 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.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
  • C3 Audit Trail: This control is scored from in-repo evidence only — a working control configured outside the repository leaves no signal a static scan can credit.
  • DM4 Rich vs anemic model: Behaviour is detected as state mutation inside a method body — a method that enforces an invariant by validating-and-throwing without mutating reads as a query, and mutation delegated through an interface the scan can't resolve isn't credited; entities with zero public properties still drop out of the population. It detects that state changes, not whether the rule is correct.
  • DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of purity.
  • ED5 Idempotency: Idempotency is judged from the handler body's visible writes and guards — a guard enforced by a database unique constraint, a broker's exactly-once delivery, or a domain method whose no-op-when-applied logic the scan can't follow may read as at-risk; the at-risk candidates are confirmed by a SAMPLED LLM verdict (advisory, not exhaustive) and degrade to heuristic-only when no model is configured. It flags the at-least-once double-apply SHAPE, not a runtime proof of a duplicate effect.
  • 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".
  • P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (5): D20, D21, D24, ED5, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score (documentation, ADR quality, naming, comment value, onboarding) — D25 sets the ADR-conformance fraction over sampled code, D22 judges API accuracy over a sample. These are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity8.9 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

5 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient at 30.

TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30)src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:618
ReflectionExtensions.TraverseObjectGraphRecursively (cognitive 26)src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs:243
EfDbContextBase.OnBeforeSaving (cognitive 18)src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Persistence/EfCore/EfDbContextBase.cs:133
ConfigureSwaggerOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 18)src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Swagger/ConfigureSwaggerOptions.cs:36
InMemoryBus.ReceivingMessages (cognitive 16)src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/Broker/InMemory/InMemoryBus.cs:72

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with TypeExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 ReflectionExtensions.TraverseObjectGraphRecursively (cognitive 26) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with ReflectionExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 EfDbContextBase.OnBeforeSaving (cognitive 18) finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with EfDbContextBase.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Cognitive Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D3 · God Classes9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1 god class(es) detected.

TooManyMethods: TypeExtensionssrc/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:0

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D4 · Code Duplication9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

7 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×2src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs:53
Duplicated block (27 lines × 2)src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Shared/Extensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions/Infrastructure.cs:41
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2)src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/Broker/InMemory/InMemoryBus.cs:88
Duplicated block (12 lines × 4)src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Shared/Extensions/ApplicationBuilderExtensions/Seed.cs:9
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2)src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/IdentityModuleConfiguration.cs:55

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D5 · Coupling9.6 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

27 projects, 0 dependency cycle(s), 1 unstable depended-on project(s).

Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo · ×9
Unstable project FoodDelivery.Api

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

2 of 38 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: Product (LCOM4 11) · ×2src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Products/Models/Product.cs:25

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D9 · Test Distribution9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

11 test methods: 2 unit, 9 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

D10 · Test Quality4.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.

Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 4.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 skipped, 2 zero-assertion, 1 mock references across 11 tests.

No assertions (empty test): Test1 · ×2tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests/UnitTest1.cs:5
Mock framework: NSubstitute

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with UnitTest1.cs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
  2. Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

96 outdated, 4 vulnerable, 7 deprecated packages.

Vulnerable: AutoMapper · ×4
Deprecated: MediatR.Extensions.Microsoft.DependencyInjection · ×7
Outdated: Ardalis.GuardClauses · ×96

What to do

  1. Resolve the 7 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).
  3. Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

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

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

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

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

0 of 114 packages use a banned license.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D16 · Bus Factor10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Small-team knowledge concentration

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D17 · Explicit Debt9.5 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.

Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

15 deducted debt markers + 9 dead symbols across 20495 LoC (0.2/KLoC) → score 9.5.

CommentedOutCode · ×11src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Swagger/ApiVersionOperationFilter.cs:19
Dead code: GenericParametersMatch · ×9src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs:209
TodoComment · ×4src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/CQRS/Event/EventHandlerDecorator.cs:17

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D18 · Solution Shape8.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

27 projects, 738 .cs files, 22087 hand-written lines of code (20495 production / 1592 test), plus 2749 generated (EF migrations / designer / snapshots, excluded from quality), 190 inter-project edges.

Shell project: FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests · ×5tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests.csproj
Thin analysable surface across projects

What to do

  1. Resolve the 5 Shell project finding(s) in Solution Shape — start with BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests.csproj, FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.EndToEndTests.csproj, FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.UnitTests.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Thin analysable surface across projects finding(s) in Solution Shape. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D20 · ADR Quality / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

D21 · Naming Consistency / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether domain types (IDs, enums, value objects) leak across bounded-context boundaries.

Method: Cross-context domain-type leakage via Roslyn structural classification (strongly-typed IDs / value objects) over every public surface. Exhaustive, deterministic, type-level aggregate-boundary check.

Coverage: Bounded contexts derived from NAMESPACE prefix (or graph-inferred where available); cross-boundary domain-type leakage then checked exhaustively over every public member of every type.

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

No domain types are scored-flagged across 6 context boundaries; 4 contract project(s) carry advisory strong-ID notes.

BuildingBlocks: 11 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums
Catalogs: 2 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums
Customers: 1 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums
Orders: 1 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d23_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D24 · Comment Value / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

42 valuable / 0 redundant across 200 sampled comments.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md.

D26 · Project Cohesion8.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 of 27 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split BuildingBlocks.Abstractions
Split BuildingBlocks.Core

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Split BuildingBlocks.Abstractions finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Split BuildingBlocks.Core finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D27 · Navigability8.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How far you must trace to follow a call — low indirection and co-located slices read easier.

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps.

Coverage: Slice locality from the first namespace segments, SAMPLED (≤400 methods) — not exhaustive.

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 8.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

90 % of calls cross a namespace and 12 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

What to do

  1. Improve Navigability — currently 8.8/10. — 90 % of calls cross a namespace and 12 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so a call's collaborators sit together and tracing stays easy. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md.

D28 · Secrets (history)0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

14 finding(s): 0 critical, 14 high, 0 medium, 0 low. Remediation for historically-committed secrets is credential rotation — they remain in history regardless of later deletion.

Secret: generic-api-key · ×14src/Api/FoodDelivery.Api/appsettings.json:12detected by gitleaks finding
Rotate the exposed credentials — git history can't be un-committed

What to do

  1. Resolve the 14 Secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with appsettings.docker.json (3), appsettings.json (3), identity.appsettings.json (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (14 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Rotate the exposed credentials finding(s) in Secrets (history). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

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

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

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep --config auto across the repo; severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a 0-10 wide normalizer. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.

Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).

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

semgrep found no security issues.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md.

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.5 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: DocumentedVerifiedPrevented · effective 9.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

High IaC: DS-0002.devcontainer/Dockerfiledetected by trivy finding
Medium IaC: DS-0001.devcontainer/Dockerfiledetected by trivy finding
Low IaC: DS-0026.devcontainer/Dockerfiledetected by trivy finding

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D34 · Knowledge Freshness0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

94 of 94 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs.

Dormant codebase

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Dormant codebase finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D35 · Change Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

Unpinned build actions
No build provenance
No artifact signing
No SBOM

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Unpinned build actions finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 No build provenance finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 No artifact signing finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d36_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

AX10 · Code composition7.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified.

Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.

Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.

What to do

  • The domain core is a small share of production code — check that business logic isn't leaking into the application/infrastructure layers (a thin domain is the anemic-domain smell).
AX2 · Stateful singletons10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

AX3 · Project dependency cycles10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).

Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.

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

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

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

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

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

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

AX6 · Interface segregation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `IConsumeContext` declares 19 members. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — IConsumeContext.cs:11

What to do

  • Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
AX7 · Slice cohesion10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether feature slices stay independent (no direct cross-slice references) — the discipline that makes vertical-slice architecture pay off.

Method: Roslyn scan (vertical-slice gated): feature slices resolved from namespaces (.Features.*, .Slices.*) or project names; cross-slice type references detected. Deterministic, traceable.

AX8 · Test isolation0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether production projects stay free of references to test projects — tests may depend on production, never the reverse.

Method: Csproj graph: each production project checked for references to test projects (identified by test-framework presence, not name). Zero violations is clean. Deterministic.

  • `BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests` (production) references the test project `Tests.Shared`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.
  • `FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.EndToEndTests` (production) references the test project `Tests.Shared`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.
  • `FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.IntegrationTests` (production) references the test project `Tests.Shared`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.
  • `FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.UnitTests` (production) references the test project `Tests.Shared`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.
  • `FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests` (production) references the test project `Tests.Shared`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.
  • `FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.IntegrationTests` (production) references the test project `Tests.Shared`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.
  • `FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.UnitTests` (production) references the test project `Tests.Shared`. Production must never depend on test code — it pulls a unit-test framework and test fixtures into the shipped product and inverts the only correct direction (tests depend on production, never the reverse). Move any shared helper into a production support library, or invert the reference.

What to do

  • Remove every production → test project reference: extract any shared test helper into a production support library (which the tests reference), or invert the dependency so the test project depends on production — not the reverse.
AX9 · CQS / query purity10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

C1 · Data Protection0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

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

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

C3 · Audit Trail5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • An audit marker (IAuditable / AddAuditing) was found, but no structural mechanism (an EF SaveChanges interceptor, an immutable audit-log type, or [Audited] usage) — the trail's completeness can't be confirmed from the source.

What to do

  • Back the audit convention with a structural mechanism: an EF SaveChanges interceptor (or equivalent) writing every sensitive change to an immutable audit log, and apply [Audited] to the entities that need a who-changed-what trail.
DM1 · Aggregate boundaries5.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates reference each other by identity (id) rather than by direct object reference — the core DDD consistency-boundary rule.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): aggregate roots identified by convention; each aggregate field checked for direct references to other aggregates versus id-only. Deterministic, DDD-native.

Coverage: Population: aggregate roots identified by AggregateRoot/IAggregateRoot base/interface NAME convention; reference-by-identity then checked exhaustively within that set — a root not using those names is invisible.

  • `Product` references the aggregate root `Category` directly (via `Category`) — hold its `CategoryId` instead. — Product.cs:34
  • `Product` references the aggregate root `Brand` directly (via `Brand`) — hold its `BrandId` instead. — Product.cs:39

What to do

  • Reference other aggregates by their strongly-typed id, never by object reference, so each aggregate stays an independent consistency boundary.
DM2 · Strongly-typed ids3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — How much of the domain uses strongly-typed ids vs raw Guid/string/int — adoption curve, not all-or-nothing.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): strongly-typed id adoption on domain entities/events; raw Guid/int/string ids counted versus wrapped types. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

Coverage: Population: id-like members by *Id/*Key NAME suffix; strongly-typed-ID shape then checked semantically — non-suffixed identifiers are not seen.

  • `IEvent.EventId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct EventId { Guid Value }`). — IEvent.cs:13
  • `IMessage.MessageId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct MessageId { Guid Value }`). — IMessage.cs:7
  • `Event.EventId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct EventId { Guid Value }`). — Event.cs:8
  • `Message.MessageId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct MessageId { Guid Value }`). — Message.cs:7
  • `MaxThresholdChanged.ProductId` is a raw `Int64` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct ProductId { Int64 Value }`). — MaxThresholdChanged.cs:5
  • `RestockThresholdChanged.ProductId` is a raw `Int64` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct ProductId { Int64 Value }`). — RestockThresholdChanged.cs:5
  • `ProductCreatedNotification.CategoryId` is a raw `Int64` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct CategoryId { Int64 Value }`). — ProductCreatedNotification.cs:13
  • `Customer.IdentityId` is a raw `Guid` — give it a strongly-typed id (`readonly record struct IdentityId { Guid Value }`). — Customer.cs:11

What to do

  • Adopt strongly-typed ids across the domain — finish the migration or document the boundary; primitive ids invite transposed-argument bugs.
DM3 · Integration-event coupling5.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether cross-context integration events stay loosely coupled — no producer-owned enums/domain types leaking to consumers. Shared-kernel/contracts types are allowed.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): integration-event properties scanned for producer-domain type/enum leaks versus primitives and shared-kernel types. Deterministic, hard fact.

  • `UserStateUpdated.OldUserState` exposes `UserState`, a enum owned by the producer's domain assembly (`FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity`) — carry the enum as a string/int instead. — UserStateUpdated.cs:6
  • `UserStateUpdated.NewUserState` exposes `UserState`, a enum owned by the producer's domain assembly (`FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity`) — carry the enum as a string/int instead. — UserStateUpdated.cs:6

What to do

  • Keep integration events to primitives + shared-contract types; never reference a producer-domain enum or type, so services evolve independently.
DM4 · Rich vs anemic model5.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether aggregates/entities carry the behaviour that protects their invariants, rather than being data bags driven by external services.

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

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

  • `Aggregate` is an aggregate/entity with 1 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — Aggregate.cs:9
  • `AuditableEntity` is an aggregate/entity with 2 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — AuditableEntity.cs:5
  • `AuditAggregate` is an aggregate/entity with 2 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — AuditAggregate.cs:5
  • `Supplier` is an aggregate/entity with 1 data propert(ies) but no state-changing behaviour (only data and queries) — the business logic lives in a service. — Supplier.cs:5

What to do

  • Move business rules onto the aggregates/entities they govern so invariants are enforced at the source, not in anemic services.
DM5 · Encapsulated state9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether entities protect their state (private/init-only setters) instead of exposing public setters that bypass invariants. Softened when a rehydration framework (Marten/EF) is present.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): public setters on entities detected; score softened when Marten/EF rehydration frameworks present. Deterministic, framework-aware.

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

  • `Product` exposes public setter(s) (Stock). — Product.cs:25

What to do

  • Make entity setters private/init-only; change state only through methods that enforce the invariants (Marten/EF can bind via constructor or private setters).
DM6 · Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether the domain layer stays free of infrastructure dependencies (EF/Marten/HTTP/ASP.NET) — the clean-architecture dependency rule.

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

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

  • `ChangingProductBrandValidationHandler` (domain layer) uses `DbContext` inside a method body — infrastructure reached without it appearing in any signature. — ChangingProductBrand.cs:12
  • `ProductCreatedHandler` (domain layer) uses `EF Core` inside a method body — infrastructure reached without it appearing in any signature. — ProductCreated.cs:14
  • `RestockSubscriptionCreatedHandler` (domain layer) uses `DbContext` inside a method body — infrastructure reached without it appearing in any signature. — RestockSubscriptionCreated.cs:32

What to do

  • Invert domain→infrastructure dependencies: declare interfaces in the domain, implement them in infrastructure (Dependency Inversion).
DM8 · Value-object opportunities10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether clusters of primitives that travel together (a missing value object) are extracted — a low-weight suggestion, LLM-confirmed when configured.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): primitive parameter clusters recurring three or more times across signatures extracted, then confirmed by language model when configured. Advisory, low-weight.

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

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

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

ED3 · Event naming8.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `IEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — IEvent.cs:8
  • `IDomainEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — IDomainEvent.cs:6
  • `IDomainNotificationEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — IDomainNotificationEvent.cs:9
  • `IIntegrationEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — IIntegrationEvent.cs:6
  • `IMessage` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — IMessage.cs:5
  • `IStreamEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. (×2) — IStreamEvent.cs:6, IStreamEvent.cs:13
  • `Event` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — Event.cs:6
  • `DomainEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — DomainEvent.cs:5
  • `DomainNotificationEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — DomainNotificationEvent.cs:5
  • `DomainNotificationEventWrapper` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — DomainNotificationEventWrapper.cs:5
  • `IntegrationEventWrapper` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — IntegrationEventWrapper.cs:6
  • `NotificationEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — NotificationEvent.cs:4
  • `IntegrationEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — IntegrationEvent.cs:5
  • `Message` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — Message.cs:5
  • `StreamEvent` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. (×2) — StreamEvent.cs:7, StreamEvent.cs:10
  • `ChangingProductBrand` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — ChangingProductBrand.cs:10
  • `ChangingProductCategory` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — ChangingProductCategory.cs:10
  • `ChangingProductSupplier` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — ChangingProductSupplier.cs:10
  • `CreatingProduct` reads as an instruction, not a fact that happened. Events describe something that already occurred — name them in the past tense (e.g. `OrderPlaced`, `PaymentCaptured`) so the ubiquitous language stays clear. — CreatingProduct.cs:10

What to do

  • Name events in the past tense — they record facts that already happened.
ED4 · Outbox / dual-write7.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `DeleteRestockSubscriptionsByTimeHandler.Handle` writes to the database AND publishes to the message bus in the same flow, with no outbox referenced in this path. These two writes aren't atomic — a crash between them either loses the message (DB committed, publish failed) or emits a phantom event (publish succeeded, DB rolled back). Use the transactional outbox pattern (e.g. MassTransit's EF/Marten outbox) so the message is committed in the same transaction as the state change and dispatched afterwards. — DeleteRestockSubscriptionsByTime.cs:31
  • `SendEmailVerificationCodeHandler.Handle` writes to the database AND publishes to the message bus in the same flow, with no outbox referenced in this path. These two writes aren't atomic — a crash between them either loses the message (DB committed, publish failed) or emits a phantom event (publish succeeded, DB rolled back). Use the transactional outbox pattern (e.g. MassTransit's EF/Marten outbox) so the message is committed in the same transaction as the state change and dispatched afterwards. — SendEmailVerificationCode.cs:36

What to do

  • Adopt the transactional outbox pattern so DB writes and message publishes commit atomically — no lost or phantom events on a crash.
ED5 · Idempotency9.6 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

Other · Readiness — Whether retry-prone mutations (command handlers + message/event consumers) are idempotent so an at-least-once redelivery or client retry doesn't double-apply the effect — heuristic at-risk detection confirmed by language model, advisory.

Method: Roslyn heuristic (any mutation, ungated): command handlers and message/event consumers that mutate persistent state without a visible idempotency guard (exists/dedup check, upsert, idempotency-key/inbox, conditional/versioned write, fixed-value set) flagged as at-risk; each at-risk candidate then confirmed or cleared by a language model as genuinely non-idempotent versus naturally-idempotent. Advisory without a model (heuristic-only, degraded), per-candidate judged with one.

Coverage: Population: retry-prone mutations — command handlers (CQRS write side) + message/event consumers (IConsumer/I*EventHandler) — that mutate persistent state; runs on any repo with mutations, not only event-driven ones. The at-risk subset (no obvious guard) is a HEURISTIC candidate set, each then LLM-JUDGED non-idempotent vs safe; a handler outside those conventions, or a guard the LLM can't confirm, is bounded by the sample. Degrades to heuristic-only when no model is configured.

  • `UpdatingProduct.UpdateProductCommandHandler.Handle` mutates persistent state (a database save) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write. — UpdateProduct.cs:50

What to do

  • Make retry-prone mutations idempotent — guard each write with an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write, so a re-run doesn't double-apply.
GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs7.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `StopAsync` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in. — InMemoryBus.cs:67
  • `ProcessInbox` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in. — InMemoryMessagePersistenceService.cs:216
  • `CommitAsync` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in. — InMemoryEventStore.cs:113
  • `Handle` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work. — ProductCreatedNotification.cs:27
  • `Handle` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in. (×3) — SupplierCreated.cs:11, SupplierDeleted.cs:10, SupplierUpdated.cs:11
  • `HandleAsync` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in. (×2) — ProductCreated.cs:13, CustomerCreated.cs:12
  • A line of code has been commented out rather than removed — dead weight that rots and confuses. Delete it (version control remembers). (×15) — InMemoryEventStore.cs:83, RetryBehavior.cs:29, Extensions.cs:83, …

What to do

  • Finish or delete the unfinished stubs (NotImplementedException / empty / constant-returning bodies) — they are dead surface that looks live.
  • Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.
M1 · Documentation (README)8.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.
  • Add a README to the 10 of 27 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 0.7 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.

Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No Architecture Decision Records found — decisions aren't captured for future maintainers.
  • No C4/PlantUML/Mermaid diagram or architecture.md — the high-level shape isn't documented.

What to do

  • Start an ADR log (docs/adr/) recording significant decisions and their rationale.
  • Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Only 15/27 projects share a common root namespace — the code's module identity is inconsistent.

What to do

  • Adopt a consistent root-namespace convention (a shared prefix, e.g. Acme.*); short project-file/directory names are fine as long as the RootNamespace is uniform.
M4 · Documentation accuracy9.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.

P1 · CI/CD gates10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

P2 · Observability7.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Only 14/19 service-like projects use logging (pure contract/DTO projects are excluded — they have nothing to log).

What to do

  • Extend structured logging to the remaining service-like projects so the whole executable surface is diagnosable in production.
  • Add OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (ActivitySource / AddMetrics) so requests are traceable across the system, not just health-probable.
P3 · Security & performance tooling4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

  • Add readiness/liveness probes and a rolling-update (or blue/green) strategy so a bad release is caught and rolled back automatically.
P5 · DR & Backup0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether disaster recovery is planned and codified — backups, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees — from IaC + container manifests + docs, never the live cloud.

Method: Filesystem scan: disaster recovery, backup, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees from IaC, manifests, and docs. Exhaustive, deterministic, never a live environment.

  • A persistence guard (data volume / purge-protection) was found, but no backup, geo-recovery or RTO/RPO controls were evidenced — a volume that survives a container recreate is not a tested restore from catastrophic loss.

What to do

  • Codify backups + geo-recovery in IaC and document RTO/RPO and the restore procedure — a persistence guard alone is not disaster recovery.
P7 · Outbound HTTP resilience10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

PF1 · Benchmark discipline6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the library protects its performance with benchmarks — a BenchmarkDotNet suite, an allocation MemoryDiagnoser, and (ideally) a CI gate. Presence is credited as a bonus, never a deduction.

Method: Repo + source scan: BenchmarkDotNet referenced (csproj/source), [Benchmark]/[MemoryDiagnoser] attribute counts, and a benchmark step in CI — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

  • No BenchmarkDotNet suite was found. For a performance-sensitive library, a benchmark guards against silent regressions — but it's a bonus here, not a deduction.

What to do

  • Add a BenchmarkDotNet project for the hot paths (with [MemoryDiagnoser] to track allocations), and run it in CI to catch regressions.
PF2 · Allocation hygiene6.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's GC — Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs and buffer writers. Reward-only: credited where present, never penalised where a simpler style is fine.

Method: Production-source scan: density (per 1k LoC) of allocation-aware APIs — Span/Memory, ArrayPool/ObjectPool, stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs, IBufferWriter, string.Create, SkipLocalsInit. Reward-only. Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

What to do

  • Raise allocation-aware density on the hot paths — currently 26 use(s) across 23,670 production line(s) (~1.1/1k). More Span/Memory, pooling (ArrayPool/ObjectPool), stackalloc and ValueTask on the allocation-heavy paths climbs this toward 10.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code keeps its host responsive — a library awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) (so it never captures and stalls the host's context) and avoids sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) that wastes threads and risks deadlock.

Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) counted everywhere, and — for a library with ≥5 awaits — the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

  • 2 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock in a consumer with a synchronization context.

What to do

  • Make the call chain async end-to-end and await it — never block on a Task with .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in library code.
S1 · Web-Security Posture4.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `RequireHttpsMetadata = false` allows the OIDC discovery doc to be fetched over plain HTTP. Safe for loopback-only fetches (Aspire / on-host); risky for any other path. — JwtExtensions.cs:51
  • No Content-Security-Policy / X-Frame-Options / X-Content-Type-Options configuration found — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • No UseHttpsRedirection/UseHsts and no reverse-proxy signal — transport security is unverified at the app layer. (−2.0 on this card.)
  • No CookieSecurePolicy/HttpOnly/SameSite configuration found. (−1.5 on this card; skip if the app sets no cookies.)

What to do

  • Set RequireHttpsMetadata = true in prod (or pin MetadataAddress to a localhost URL the API can hit directly).
  • Add security response headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them.
  • Enforce HTTPS at the app layer (UseHttpsRedirection / UseHsts) — only skip this if a reverse proxy demonstrably terminates TLS.
  • Set secure cookie flags — CookieSecurePolicy.Always, HttpOnly, and SameSite (Strict/Lax) on auth/session cookies. Skip only if the app sets no cookies.
X1 · Async correctness7.7 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Make the caller `async` and `await` instead. (×2) — DomainEventsInvoker.cs:41, Program.cs:159

What to do

  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk)
X2 · Cancellation propagation8.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Only 124/175 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so requests can't be cancelled cleanly under load or on client disconnect. In Blazor Server circuits and other short-write hosts, omitting it can be an accepted convention — judge against your hosting model.
  • No CancellationToken parameter — work can't be cancelled cleanly on disconnect/shutdown. (×25) — InMemoryCacheProvider.cs:19, InMemoryCacheProvider.cs:39, InMemoryCacheProvider.cs:45, …

What to do

  • Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
X3 · Exception handling10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

X4 · Structured logging7.3 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. — MessagePersistenceBackgroundService.cs:34

What to do

  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging
X5 · Nullable reference types8.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether nullable reference types are enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` suppression.

Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.

  • ~1.5 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.

What to do

  • Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.

Reference — by lens

The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health79%StrongSolid.
Architecture67%Adequate — gated by AX8Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity52%Adequate — gated by D34, M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness38%Weak — gated by D12, P5Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security37%Weak — gated by D28, D36, C1Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Domain Modelling51%Adequate — gated by DM2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event-Driven83%StrongStrongest area.
Performance64%AdequateAcceptable, with room to improve.
Not included — 31 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

  • AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — no data
  • C4 Data Retention — Repo shows no data-retention / TTL / cleanup mechanism for personal data (event-sourced storage — lifecycle is stream archival / event TTL, not row CASCADE) — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Define retention periods and a purge/cleanup job (or TTL) in code, or document where retention is enforced, so this dimension can be scored.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Repo shows no corroborated data-subject-rights mechanism (erasure / export-portability / consent) tied to a subject id or GDPR vocabulary — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Implement erasure, data export/portability and consent tracking over the subject's records.
  • D11 Test Reliability — No tests discovered
  • D19 Documentation Quality — LLM evaluation failed
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — No exposed public API
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan for NuGet CVEs — excluded rather than scored; re-run on an SDK that can restore this solution
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.
  • D33 JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside bin/obj (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md, .github/SECURITY.md, docs/SECURITY.md, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
  • D38 OSV Dependency Vulnerabilities — No JS/npm lockfile found outside bin/obj (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); nothing for OSV to scan.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — The target did not build, so no IL was available to measure.
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
  • D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not measured
  • DM7 Repository granularity — no repository abstraction detected (e.g. uses a document session)
  • ED2 Event/command shape — no command-shaped messages detected — single-handler-per-command check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — applicable but skipped (2/3 markers — below the conservative bar): an event-store package (Marten/EventStore); an append-only event-store seam (IEventStore/Append-of-events)
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — no data
  • P6 Release Hygiene — not evidenced — no changelog, version stamp or semver release tag in the repo
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — run tests with `--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage"` (or in CI) to enable this cross-layer check
  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — no data
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — no data
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — no data

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Issue — 21 finding(s)
D28 · Secrets (history) · Secret · ×14
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/FoodDelivery.Api/appsettings.json:12 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/FoodDelivery.Api/appsettings.docker.json:12 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/FoodDelivery.Api/tempkey.jwk:1 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/identity.appsettings.json:23 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Modules/Identity/ECommerce.Modules.Identity/identity.appsettings.json:23 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Modules/Catalogs/ECommerce.Modules.Catalogs/catalogs.appsettings.json:19 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Modules/Customers/ECommerce.Modules.Customers/customers.appsettings.json:19 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Modules/Identity/ECommerce.Modules.Identity/identity.appsettings.json:19 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Modules/Orders/ECommerce.Modules.Orders/orders.appsettings.json:19 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/ECommerce.Api/tempkey.jwk:1 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/ECommerce.Api/appsettings.docker.json:22 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/ECommerce.Api/appsettings.docker.json:53 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/ECommerce.Api/appsettings.json:22 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
  • Secret: generic-api-key src/Api/ECommerce.Api/appsettings.json:53 — matched rule 'generic-api-key'
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Vulnerable · ×4
  • Vulnerable: AutoMapper — AutoMapper 12.0.1 — High severity. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
  • Vulnerable: OpenTelemetry.Api — OpenTelemetry.Api 1.9.0 — Moderate severity. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
  • Vulnerable: MailKit — MailKit 4.7.1.1 — Moderate severity. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
  • Vulnerable: Duende.IdentityServer — Duende.IdentityServer 7.0.5 — Moderate severity. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]
D10 · Test Quality · No assertions (empty test) · ×2
  • No assertions (empty test): Test1 tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests/UnitTest1.cs:5 — Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.
  • No assertions (empty test): Test1 tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.UnitTests/UnitTest1.cs:5 — Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×1
  • High IaC: DS-0002 .devcontainer/Dockerfile — Image user should not be 'root'
Warning — 60 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · CommentedOutCode · ×11
  • CommentedOutCode src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Swagger/ApiVersionOperationFilter.cs:19 — 14 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Products/Features/GettingProducts/GetProductsRequest.cs:17 — 8 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/GettingUsers/GetUsersRequest.cs:15 — 8 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/GettingCustomers/GetCustomersRequest.cs:19 — 9 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode tests/building-blocks/Core/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests/BusPublishTests.cs:30 — 9 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/DeletingRestockSubscriptionsByTime/DeleteRestockSubscriptionsByTime.cs:46 — 4 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode tests/building-blocks/Core/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests/BusPublishTests.cs:69 — 4 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/GettingRestockSubscriptions/GetRestockSubscriptionsRequest.cs:24 — 11 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode tests/building-blocks/Core/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests/BusPublishTests.cs:1 — 13 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode tests/building-blocks/Core/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests/BusPublishTests.cs:26 — 3 consecutive commented-code lines
  • CommentedOutCode tests/building-blocks/Core/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests/BusPublishTests.cs:104 — 3 consecutive commented-code lines
D17 · Explicit Debt · Dead code · ×9
  • Dead code: GenericParametersMatch src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs:209 — Method GenericParametersMatch — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: GetImplementedInterfacesToMap src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:495 — Method GetImplementedInterfacesToMap — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: IsRecord src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:724 — Method IsRecord — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: MapBrandsEndpoints src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Brands/Configs.cs:15 — Method MapBrandsEndpoints — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: MapCategoriesEndpoints src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Categories/Configs.cs:15 — Method MapCategoriesEndpoints — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: MapSuppliersEndpoints src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Suppliers/Configs.cs:15 — Method MapSuppliersEndpoints — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: CustomerAlreadyCompletedException src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Exceptions/Domain/CustomerAlreadyCompletedException.cs:5 — NamedType CustomerAlreadyCompletedException — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: CustomerAlreadyVerifiedException src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Exceptions/Domain/CustomerAlreadyVerifiedException.cs:5 — NamedType CustomerAlreadyVerifiedException — no references found in solution.
  • Dead code: CustomerNotActiveException src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Exceptions/Domain/CustomerNotActiveException.cs:5 — NamedType CustomerNotActiveException — no references found in solution.
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×9
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo — BuildingBlocks.Persistence.Mongo: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.13, distance 0.87 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Logging — BuildingBlocks.Logging: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.13, distance 0.87 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Core — BuildingBlocks.Core: abstractness 0.15, instability 0.04, distance 0.81 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory — BuildingBlocks.Caching.InMemory: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.20, distance 0.80 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Monitoring — BuildingBlocks.Monitoring: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.20, distance 0.80 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Swagger — BuildingBlocks.Swagger: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.20, distance 0.80 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Validation — BuildingBlocks.Validation: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.20, distance 0.80 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Security — BuildingBlocks.Security: abstractness 0.10, instability 0.13, distance 0.76 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
  • Off the main sequence: BuildingBlocks.Web — BuildingBlocks.Web: abstractness 0.12, instability 0.13, distance 0.75 — zone of pain — concrete and heavily depended-on, so it's rigid to change.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated · ×7
  • Deprecated: MediatR.Extensions.Microsoft.DependencyInjection — MediatR.Extensions.Microsoft.DependencyInjection 11.1.0 — Legacy MediatR >= 12.0.0
  • Deprecated: Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.Abstractions — Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.Abstractions 2.2.0 — Other,Legacy
  • Deprecated: AutoMapper.Extensions.Microsoft.DependencyInjection — AutoMapper.Extensions.Microsoft.DependencyInjection 12.0.1 — Legacy AutoMapper >= 13.0.0
  • Deprecated: SqlStreamStore — SqlStreamStore 1.2.1-alpha.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: FluentValidation.AspNetCore — FluentValidation.AspNetCore 11.3.0 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: Serilog.Sinks.Elasticsearch — Serilog.Sinks.Elasticsearch 10.0.0 — Legacy Elastic.Serilog.Sinks >= 0.0.0
  • Deprecated: xunit — xunit 2.9.0 — Legacy xunit.v3 >= 0.0.0
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×4
  • TodoComment src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/CQRS/Event/EventHandlerDecorator.cs:17 — // TODO: Using Activity for tracing — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Persistence/EfCore/EfDbContextBase.cs:147 — // var userId = GetCurrentUser(); // TODO: Get current user — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/IdentityModuleConfiguration.cs:43 — // TODO: Add Monitoring — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/Modules/Orders/FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders/Orders/Models/Order.cs:13 — //TODO: Complete order domain model — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: PROJ-123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs:53 — src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs:53-61 | src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:69-77
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Resiliency/Extensions/HttpClientBuilderExtensions.CircuitBreaker.cs:13 — src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Resiliency/Extensions/HttpClientBuilderExtensions.CircuitBreaker.cs:13-20 | src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Resiliency/Extensions/HttpClientBuilderExtensions.Retry.cs:13-21
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×2
  • Low cohesion: Product (LCOM4 11) src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Products/Models/Product.cs:25 — Product's methods form 11 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
  • Low cohesion: EventProcessor (LCOM4 4) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/CQRS/Event/EventProcessor.cs:10 — EventProcessor's methods form 4 groups that share no state and don't call each other — a sign it may have several responsibilities. Review whether it splits into focused classes.
D19 · Documentation Quality · LLM evaluation failed · ×1
  • LLM evaluation failed — JSON parse error: Expected end of string, but instead reached end of data. Path: $.findings[1].issue | LineNumber: 0 | BytePositionInLine: 1360.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30) · ×1
  • TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient (cognitive 30) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:618 — TypeExtensions.AddImplementationsAsTransient has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ReflectionExtensions.TraverseObjectGraphRecursively (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • ReflectionExtensions.TraverseObjectGraphRecursively (cognitive 26) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/ReflectionExtensions.cs:243 — ReflectionExtensions.TraverseObjectGraphRecursively has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · EfDbContextBase.OnBeforeSaving (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • EfDbContextBase.OnBeforeSaving (cognitive 18) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Persistence/EfCore/EfDbContextBase.cs:133 — EfDbContextBase.OnBeforeSaving has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ConfigureSwaggerOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • ConfigureSwaggerOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion (cognitive 18) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Swagger/ConfigureSwaggerOptions.cs:36 — ConfigureSwaggerOptions.CreateInfoForApiVersion has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15).
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · InMemoryBus.ReceivingMessages (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • InMemoryBus.ReceivingMessages (cognitive 16) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/Broker/InMemory/InMemoryBus.cs:72 — InMemoryBus.ReceivingMessages has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15).
D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×1
  • TooManyMethods: TypeExtensions src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Extensions/TypeExtensions.cs:0 — TooManyMethods — 458 lines, 61 methods.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×1
  • Medium IaC: DS-0001 .devcontainer/Dockerfile — ':latest' tag used
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · Unpinned build actions · ×1
  • Unpinned build actions — CI references GitHub Actions by a floating ref (@main / @tag) rather than a pinned commit SHA, weakening build integrity.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (27 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (27 lines × 2) src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Shared/Extensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions/Infrastructure.cs:41 — src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Shared/Extensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions/Infrastructure.cs:41-54 | src/Modules/Orders/FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders/Shared/Extensions/ServiceCollectionExtensions/Infrastructure.cs:31-57
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/Broker/InMemory/InMemoryBus.cs:88 — src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/Broker/InMemory/InMemoryBus.cs:88-103 | src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/Broker/InMemory/InMemoryBus.cs:130-145
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 4) src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Shared/Extensions/ApplicationBuilderExtensions/Seed.cs:9 — src/Modules/Catalogs/FoodDelivery.Modules.Catalogs/Shared/Extensions/ApplicationBuilderExtensions/Seed.cs:9-20 | src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Shared/Extensions/ApplicationBuilderExtensions/Seed.cs:9-20 | src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Shared/Extensions/ApplicationBuilderExtensions/Seed.cs:13-24 | src/Modules/Orders/FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders/Shared/Extensions/ApplicationBuilderExtensions/Seed.cs:13-24
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/IdentityModuleConfiguration.cs:55 — src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/IdentityModuleConfiguration.cs:55-66 | src/Modules/Orders/FoodDelivery.Modules.Orders/OrdersModuleConfiguration.cs:50-61
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/MessagePersistence/InMemory/InMemoryMessagePersistenceService.cs:159 — src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/MessagePersistence/InMemory/InMemoryMessagePersistenceService.cs:159-169 | src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Messaging/MessagePersistence/InMemory/InMemoryMessagePersistenceService.cs:185-195
D5 · Coupling · Unstable project FoodDelivery.Api · ×1
  • Unstable project FoodDelivery.Api — FoodDelivery.Api has instability 0.85 with 3 dependents.
D8 · Code Coverage · Coverage not measured · ×1
  • Coverage not measured — The test suite couldn't be built/run in-image and no coverage report is committed, so line coverage was not measured — and it is EXCLUDED from the score rather than scored on a LoC-ratio proxy. Commit the Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov report your CI already produces (anywhere in the repo), or make the suite runnable in-image, and real coverage will be measured.
Recommendation — 17 finding(s)
D18 · Solution Shape · Shell project · ×5
  • Shell project: FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests.csproj — `FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.EndToEndTests` contributes only 8 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.UnitTests tests/modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.UnitTests/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.UnitTests.csproj — `FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.UnitTests` contributes only 8 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests tests/building-blocks/Core/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests/BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests.csproj — `BuildingBlocks.Core.IntegrationTests` contributes only 0 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.UnitTests tests/modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.UnitTests/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.UnitTests.csproj — `FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.UnitTests` contributes only 0 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
  • Shell project: FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.EndToEndTests tests/modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.EndToEndTests/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.EndToEndTests.csproj — `FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers.EndToEndTests` contributes only 0 significant line(s) — an empty/placeholder project is structural noise. Remove it or fold its contents into a real project.
D11 · Test Reliability · No tests discovered · ×1
  • No tests discovered — Test reliability not scored — the test tier(s) built and ran but no tests were discovered, so reliability couldn't be exercised.
D16 · Bus Factor · Small-team knowledge concentration · ×1
  • Small-team knowledge concentration — 0 file(s) are concentrated to one author — the ambient state with 2 active author(s), not 0 separate risks. The signal becomes meaningful as ownership spreads; no per-file action implied now.
D18 · Solution Shape · Thin analysable surface across projects · ×1
  • Thin analysable surface across projects — 1 project(s) carry only a thin slice of real code (e.g. `FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity.IntegrationTests` with 49 significant line(s)). The mean analysable-surface weight is 81 %, lowering Solution Shape by about 1.5 point(s). Consolidate thin projects or grow them into substantial, well-scoped assemblies.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found at common paths; consider documenting architectural decisions in Docs/ADL/ or similar.
D26 · Project Cohesion · Split BuildingBlocks.Abstractions · ×1
  • Split BuildingBlocks.Abstractions — A generic 'BuildingBlocks' catch-all at 25 namespaces is a sprawling grab-bag. Suggested: by namespace: split the 25 unrelated building-block modules into cohesive libraries
D26 · Project Cohesion · Split BuildingBlocks.Core · ×1
  • Split BuildingBlocks.Core — Core is large and spans 36 namespaces despite being named 'Core', so it crosses both size and spread thresholds. Suggested: by namespace: separate the 36 core domains into focused libraries
D28 · Secrets (history) · Rotate the exposed credentials · ×1
  • Rotate the exposed credentials — git history can't be un-committed — Some of these secrets are in git HISTORY: deleting the file does not remove them (the commit persists on every clone, fork and backup). The remediation is to ROTATE each historically-exposed credential and treat it as compromised — not to delete the file. Rewriting history is disruptive and unreliable across existing forks. (Working-tree-only secrets — no commit — can instead be removed from the file and moved to a secret store.)
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×1
  • Low IaC: DS-0026 .devcontainer/Dockerfile — No HEALTHCHECK defined
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Dormant codebase · ×1
  • Dormant codebase — 94 of 94 significant files have no living knowledge — the codebase as a whole is dormant, not 94 separate risks. Re-engage owners or document before change.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · No build provenance · ×1
  • No build provenance — No SLSA provenance generation or build attestation found in CI (e.g. slsa-github-generator, actions/attest-build-provenance).
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · No artifact signing · ×1
  • No artifact signing — No artifact signing found in CI (e.g. cosign / sigstore / gitsign).
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · No SBOM · ×1
  • No SBOM — No SBOM generation or committed SBOM found (e.g. syft / anchore/sbom-action / *.spdx.json / *.cdx.json).
Info — 102 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×96
  • Outdated: Ardalis.GuardClauses — Ardalis.GuardClauses 4.6.0 → 5.0.0 available.
  • Outdated: AsyncAwaitBestPractices — AsyncAwaitBestPractices 8.0.0 → 10.0.0 available.
  • Outdated: AsyncFixer — AsyncFixer 1.6.0 → 2.1.0 available.
  • Outdated: AutoMapper — AutoMapper 12.0.1 → 16.1.1 available.
  • Outdated: Meziantou.Analyzer — Meziantou.Analyzer 2.0.161 → 3.0.117 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.Abstractions — Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.Abstractions 2.2.0 → 2.3.11 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Abstractions — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Abstractions 8.0.7 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Design — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Design 8.0.7 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Abstractions 8.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions 8.0.1 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Hosting.Abstractions 8.0.0 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions 8.0.1 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Options — Microsoft.Extensions.Options 8.0.2 → 10.0.9 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.VisualStudio.Threading.Analyzers — Microsoft.VisualStudio.Threading.Analyzers 17.10.48 → 18.7.23 available.
  • Outdated: MongoDB.Driver — MongoDB.Driver 2.27.0 → 3.9.0 available.
  • Outdated: Roslynator.Analyzers — Roslynator.Analyzers 4.12.4 → 4.15.0 available.
  • Outdated: Roslynator.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers — Roslynator.CodeAnalysis.Analyzers 4.12.4 → 4.15.0 available.
  • Outdated: Roslynator.Formatting.Analyzers — Roslynator.Formatting.Analyzers 4.12.4 → 4.15.0 available.
  • Outdated: Bogus — Bogus 35.5.1 → 35.6.5 available.
  • Outdated: DotNetEnv — DotNetEnv 3.0.0 → 3.2.0 available.
  • Outdated: EFCore.NamingConventions — EFCore.NamingConventions 8.0.3 → 10.0.1 available.
  • Outdated: Humanizer — Humanizer 2.14.1 → 3.0.10 available.
  • Outdated: Humanizer.Core — Humanizer.Core 2.14.1 → 3.0.10 available.
  • Outdated: McMaster.NETCore.Plugins — McMaster.NETCore.Plugins 1.4.0 → 2.0.0 available.
  • Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore 8.0.7 → 10.0.9 available.
  • + 71 more in this group — see findings.md.
D10 · Test Quality · Mock framework · ×1
  • Mock framework: NSubstitute — Tests.Shared references NSubstitute.
D22 · Internal API Consistency · No exposed public API · ×1
  • No exposed public API — No intentionally-exposed types (IsPackable or .Contracts) to evaluate.
D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · BuildingBlocks · ×1
  • BuildingBlocks: 11 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums — In BuildingBlocks, 11 contract type(s) (AggregateStore, EventSourcedAggregate, ExpectedStreamVersion, IAggregateStore, IEventStore, InMemoryEventStore, InMemoryMessagePersistenceService, InMemoryStream, +3 more) expose strong-typed ids/value objects (ExpectedStreamVersion, IBusinessRule, IMessageSerializer, ISerializer, StreamName, StreamReadPosition, StreamTruncatePosition); a serialized contract could expose the underlying primitive instead. Advisory — a deliberate strong-ID style is fine.
D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Catalogs · ×1
  • Catalogs: 2 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums — In Catalogs, 2 contract type(s) (SupplierDeleted, SupplierDeletedConsumer) expose strong-typed ids/value objects (SupplierDeleted); a serialized contract could expose the underlying primitive instead. Advisory — a deliberate strong-ID style is fine.
D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Customers · ×1
  • Customers: 1 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums — In Customers, 1 contract type(s) (CustomerCreated) expose strong-typed ids/value objects (CustomerCreated); a serialized contract could expose the underlying primitive instead. Advisory — a deliberate strong-ID style is fine.
D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Orders · ×1
  • Orders: 1 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums — In Orders, 1 contract type(s) (CustomerCreatedConsumer) expose strong-typed ids/value objects (CustomerCreated); a serialized contract could expose the underlying primitive instead. Advisory — a deliberate strong-ID style is fine.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaksgitleaks detect --no-banner --report-format json --report-path /dev/stdout --exit-code 0 --source .14artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrepsemgrep --config auto --json --quiet --timeout 0 --metrics off .0
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesdotnetdotnet: not applicable — the solution did not restore on the analyzer's .NET SDK (an SDK/target-framework/restore mismatch, common for an older codebase), so there was no restored dependency graph to scan for NuGet CVEs — excluded rather than scored; re-run on an SDK that can restore this solution0
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivytrivy config --format json --quiet .3artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrepsemgrep: not applicable — No PII/GDPR-handling patterns detected (p/gdpr ruleset) — no data-compliance surface to assess.0
D33 · JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivytrivy: not applicable — No JS/npm manifest or lockfile found outside bin/obj (package.json, package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); no JS dependencies to scan.0
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosuredisclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md, .github/SECURITY.md, docs/SECURITY.md, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0
D38 · OSV Dependency Vulnerabilitiesosv-scannerosv-scanner: not applicable — No JS/npm lockfile found outside bin/obj (package-lock.json, yarn.lock, pnpm-lock.yaml, bun.lockb); nothing for OSV to scan.0

Run 019f154e-b60f-730f-b109-bb35f6697719 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Appendix C — Personal-data map

Every field, property and record parameter whose name is conventional personal data — 88 field(s) across 4 categories, each with an exact repo-relative file:line. This is the data inventory a compliance review starts from — right-to-erasure, retention, minimisation. Detected by name with a deliberately specific classifier (the same one the GDPR dimensions use, so CardDefinition or FileName don't trip); informational — it feeds no score.

Email — 43 field(s)
  • InvalidEmailException.Email src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Exception/Types/InvalidEmailException.cs:5
  • EmailObject.ReceiverEmail src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Email/IEmailSender.cs:31
  • EmailObject.SenderEmail src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Email/IEmailSender.cs:33
  • CustomerReadDto.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Dtos/CustomerReadDto.cs:8
  • CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.cs:15
  • CreateCustomer.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreatingCustomer/CreateCustomer.cs:14
  • CreateCustomerRequest.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreatingCustomer/CreateCustomerRequest.cs:3
  • CreateCustomerResponse.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreatingCustomer/CreateCustomerResponse.cs:5
  • UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.cs:16
  • Customer.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Customer.cs:12
  • CustomerReadModel.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Reads/CustomerReadModel.cs:8
  • RestockSubscriptionDto.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Dtos/RestockSubscriptionDto.cs:7
  • CreateMongoRestockSubscriptionReadModels.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/CreateMongoRestockSubscriptionReadModels.cs:16
  • CreateRestockSubscription.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/CreatingRestockSubscription/CreateRestockSubscription.cs:20
  • CreateRestockSubscriptionRequest.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/CreatingRestockSubscription/CreateRestockSubscriptionRequest.cs:3
  • RestockSubscriptionCreated.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/CreatingRestockSubscription/Events/Integration/RestockSubscriptionCreated.cs:5
  • GetRestockSubscriptions.Emails src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/GettingRestockSubscriptions/GetRestockSubscriptions.cs:17
  • GetRestockSubscriptionsRequest.Emails src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/GettingRestockSubscriptions/GetRestockSubscriptionsRequest.cs:9
  • GetRestockSubscriptionsByEmails.Emails src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/GettingRestockSubscriptionsByEmails/GetRestockSubscriptionsByEmails.cs:13
  • GetRestockSubscriptionsByEmailsRequest.Emails src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/GettingRestockSubscriptionsByEmails/GetRestockSubscriptionsByEmailsRequest.cs:3
  • SendRestockNotificationHandler._emailSender src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/SendingRestockNotification/SendRestockNotification.cs:33
  • SendRestockNotificationHandler._emailConfig src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Features/SendingRestockNotification/SendRestockNotification.cs:34
  • RestockSubscriptionReadModel.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Models/Read/RestockSubscriptionReadModel.cs:11
  • RestockSubscription.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/RestockSubscriptions/Models/Write/RestockSubscription.cs:18
  • CreateUserRequest.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Shared/Clients/Identity/Dtos/CreateUserRequest.cs:5
  • UserIdentityDto.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Shared/Clients/Identity/Dtos/UserIdentityDto.cs:7
  • UserRegistered.Email src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/Events/External/UserRegistered.cs:12
  • EmailNotConfirmedException.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Exceptions/EmailNotConfirmedException.cs:12
  • Login.UserNameOrEmail src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/Login/Login.cs:19
  • LoginFailedException.UserNameOrEmail src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/Login/LoginFailedException.cs:12
  • LoginUserRequest.UserNameOrEmail src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/Login/LoginUserRequest.cs:3
  • SendEmailVerificationCode.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/SendEmailVerificationCode/SendEmailVerificationCode.cs:15
  • SendEmailVerificationCodeHandler._emailSender src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/SendEmailVerificationCode/SendEmailVerificationCode.cs:21
  • SendEmailVerificationCodeRequest.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/SendEmailVerificationCode/SendEmailVerificationCodeRequest.cs:5
  • VerifyEmail.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/VerifyEmail/VerifyEmail.cs:13
  • VerifyEmailRequest.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/VerifyEmail/VerifyEmailRequest.cs:5
  • EmailVerificationCode.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Shared/Models/EmailVerificationCode.cs:7
  • PasswordResetCode.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Shared/Models/PasswordResetCode.cs:7
  • IdentityUserDto.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Dtos/IdentityUserDto.cs:9
  • GetUserByEmail.Email src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/GettingUerByEmail/GetUserByEmail.cs:12
  • + 3 more field(s) in this category.
Name — 34 field(s)
  • CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.cs:16
  • CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.cs:17
  • CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.FullName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.cs:18
  • CreateCustomerResponse.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreatingCustomer/CreateCustomerResponse.cs:6
  • CreateCustomerResponse.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreatingCustomer/CreateCustomerResponse.cs:7
  • UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.cs:17
  • UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.cs:18
  • UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.FullName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.cs:19
  • CustomerName.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/CustomerName.cs:8
  • CustomerName.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/CustomerName.cs:9
  • CustomerName.FullName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/CustomerName.cs:10
  • CustomerReadModel.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Reads/CustomerReadModel.cs:9
  • CustomerReadModel.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Reads/CustomerReadModel.cs:10
  • CustomerReadModel.FullName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Reads/CustomerReadModel.cs:11
  • CreateUserRequest.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Shared/Clients/Identity/Dtos/CreateUserRequest.cs:6
  • CreateUserRequest.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Shared/Clients/Identity/Dtos/CreateUserRequest.cs:7
  • UserIdentityDto.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Shared/Clients/Identity/Dtos/UserIdentityDto.cs:8
  • UserIdentityDto.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Shared/Clients/Identity/Dtos/UserIdentityDto.cs:9
  • UserRegistered.FirstName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/Events/External/UserRegistered.cs:14
  • UserRegistered.LastName src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/Events/External/UserRegistered.cs:15
  • LoginResponse.FirstName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/Login/LoginResponse.cs:20
  • LoginResponse.LastName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/Login/LoginResponse.cs:21
  • RefreshTokenResponse.FirstName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/RefreshingToken/RefreshTokenResponse.cs:19
  • RefreshTokenResponse.LastName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Identity/Features/RefreshingToken/RefreshTokenResponse.cs:20
  • ApplicationUser.FirstName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Shared/Models/ApplicationUser.cs:7
  • ApplicationUser.LastName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Shared/Models/ApplicationUser.cs:8
  • IdentityUserDto.FirstName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Dtos/IdentityUserDto.cs:10
  • IdentityUserDto.LastName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Dtos/IdentityUserDto.cs:11
  • UserRegistered.FirstName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/Events/Integration/UserRegistered.cs:9
  • UserRegistered.LastName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/Events/Integration/UserRegistered.cs:10
  • RegisterUser.FirstName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/RegisterUser.cs:14
  • RegisterUser.LastName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/RegisterUser.cs:15
  • RegisterUserRequest.FirstName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/RegisterUserRequest.cs:4
  • RegisterUserRequest.LastName src/Modules/Identity/FoodDelivery.Modules.Identity/Users/Features/RegisteringUser/RegisterUserRequest.cs:5
Phone — 6 field(s)
  • InvalidPhoneNumberException.PhoneNumber src/BuildingBlocks/BuildingBlocks.Core/Exception/Types/InvalidPhoneNumberException.cs:5
  • CustomerReadDto.PhoneNumber src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Dtos/CustomerReadDto.cs:15
  • CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.PhoneNumber src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.cs:24
  • UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.PhoneNumber src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.cs:25
  • Customer.PhoneNumber src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Customer.cs:17
  • CustomerReadModel.PhoneNumber src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Reads/CustomerReadModel.cs:18
Date of birth — 5 field(s)
  • CustomerReadDto.BirthDate src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Dtos/CustomerReadDto.cs:14
  • CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.BirthDate src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/CreateMongoCustomerReadModels.cs:23
  • UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.BirthDate src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Features/UpdateMongoCustomerReadsModel.cs:24
  • Customer.BirthDate src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Customer.cs:16
  • CustomerReadModel.BirthDate src/Modules/Customers/FoodDelivery.Modules.Customers/Customers/Models/Reads/CustomerReadModel.cs:17

Downloadable artifacts

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

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif⬇ Health changelog .md