Public report of roger-castaldo/MQContract, published 22 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive report Measured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey → Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 22 October 2026, 04:22 UTC · Survey ID cd_77efdec1580f4d8598aa5fe3278e1a02

roger-castaldo/MQContract

Measured 22 October 2026, 04:18 UTC, at code version fcd14d6

Supply-chain provenance & signing: not measured

Supply-chain provenance & signing is not measured: Supply-chain provenance is not scored (this pipeline releases no artifact), but its build steps or GitHub Actions workflows have integrity defects, or nothing watches its dependency set for published advisories.

CAI score 43out of 100 Weak
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Down 5 since the last survey

The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.

Architecture 99 Exemplary Performance 81 Strong Code Health 70 Adequate Production Readiness 58 Adequate Security and Compliance 36 Weak Maturity 31 Weak

A small codebase: 15,180 lines of product code in 76 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.3 person-years · Weakest lens: Maturity, 31

Findings by how serious they are

18 critical 127 serious 73 minor

7 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.

This survey was produced by

Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
22 October 2026, 04:18 UTC

A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.

The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸

69of 72 dimensions measured by tools. The other 3 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
166of 218 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 52 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
72dimensions across 6 lenses, read from 15,180 lines of product code in 76 projects.
Chapters

Executive summary

roger-castaldo/MQContract scores 43 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while four of its six lenses score higher still: Architecture at 99, rated Exemplary, Performance at 81, rated Strong, and Code Health at 70 and Production Readiness at 58, both rated Adequate.

The score is lower than those four because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Maturity, which scores 31 and is rated Weak. Its Architecture documentation dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault and to record your significant design decisions, and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 43 to about 52.

18 findings are critical: eight in Explicit Debt, seven in Static Analysis (SAST), two in Project dependency cycles and one in Dependency Vulnerabilities.

Watchdog couldn't measure Test Reliability and Documentation Quality in this code, so those dimensions are left out of the score. The product code is 15,180 lines, which would take an estimated 0.3 person-years, around €45,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 70 Adequate Architecture 99 ★ Exemplary Maturity 31 Weak, capped by Architecture documentation and Documentation accuracy Production Readiness 58 Adequate, capped by Security & performance tooling Security and Compliance 36 Weak, capped by Data Protection Performance 81 Strong

A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Maturity 31 · counts for 46%Security and Compliance 36 · counts for 25%Production Readiness 58 · counts for 14%Code Health 70 · counts for 8%Performance 81 · counts for 4%Architecture 99 · counts for 2%

If Maturity rose from 31 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 43 to about 52.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Business logic 9%Supporting code 16%Tests 74%Code analyzers 1%
New since the last survey: 60 findings

These 60 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026.

Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.

Fixed since the last survey: 5 findings

These 5 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Core/MessageContext.Converter.cs
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Core/MessageContext.Encoding.cs
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Core/MessageContext.Encoding.cs
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Core/MessageContext.Encoding.cs
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Core/MessageContext.Encryptors.cs
Rebuild cost: about €45,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€15,000 to €75,000, for 247 to 787 hours of work, about 0.3 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problemStandard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor×0.7 at a score of 43. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
SizeSmall: 15,180 lines of product code, of which 40% is declarations and boilerplate, 23% straight logic and 37% logic with branches
Comment linesThe estimate prices 11,677 lines. Comment lines count towards the size of 15,180 lines but aren't priced as work.

How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty.

Top priorities

The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.

1
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault.
Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
Raises the score by about 8 points · Medium effort · Data Protection
2
Record your significant design decisions.
Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Raises the score by about 6 points · Medium effort · Architecture documentation
3
Reconcile the README with reality: README.md installs the package `MQContract.Abstractions` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Abstractions`), but no project or props file references it; README.md installs the package `MQContract.Core` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Core`), but no project or props file references it; README.md installs the package `MQContract.InMemory` (`dotnet add package MQContract.InMemory`), but no project or props file references it; README.md links to `/Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md`, but `Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md` does not exist.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Medium effort · Documentation accuracy

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €45,000 to build again, about 0.3 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Maturity, at 31 (Weak). Maturity is about how well the project explains and looks after itself, which decides whether a new developer, or a new supplier, can take over. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Maturity also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Maturity grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Maturity actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 8 points for medium effort. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort

Architecture — bounded-context dependency graph

Each box is a bounded context (its layer projects grouped, or a project count when large); arrows show dependencies between contexts. A shared kernel is where many arrows converge.

arch Abstractions Abstractions ActiveMQ (Connectors/ActiveMQ) ActiveMQ) ActiveMQ (Connectors/ActiveMQ)->Abstractions ActiveMQSample ActiveMQSample ActiveMQSample->ActiveMQ (Connectors/ActiveMQ) Core Core ActiveMQSample->Core Messages Messages ActiveMQSample->Messages AmazonSNQSSample AmazonSNQSSample AmazonSNQSSample->Core AmazonSNQSSample->Messages ApachePulsarSample ApachePulsarSample ApachePulsarSample->Core ApachePulsarSample->Messages AzureServiceBus (Connectors/AzureServiceBus) AzureServiceBus) AzureServiceBus (Connectors/AzureServiceBus)->Abstractions AzureServiceBusSample AzureServiceBusSample AzureServiceBusSample->AzureServiceBus (Connectors/AzureServiceBus) AzureServiceBusSample->Core AzureServiceBusSample->Messages CQRSSample CQRSSample CQRSSample->Core InMemory (Connectors/InMemory) InMemory) CQRSSample->InMemory (Connectors/InMemory) CQRSSample->Messages Core->Abstractions GooglePubSub (Connectors/GooglePubSub) GooglePubSub) GooglePubSub (Connectors/GooglePubSub)->Abstractions GooglePubSubSample GooglePubSubSample GooglePubSubSample->Core GooglePubSubSample->GooglePubSub (Connectors/GooglePubSub) GooglePubSubSample->Messages HiveMQ (Connectors/HiveMQ) HiveMQ) HiveMQ (Connectors/HiveMQ)->Abstractions HiveMQSample HiveMQSample HiveMQSample->Core HiveMQSample->HiveMQ (Connectors/HiveMQ) HiveMQSample->Messages InMemory (Connectors/InMemory)->Abstractions InMemorySample InMemorySample InMemorySample->Core InMemorySample->InMemory (Connectors/InMemory) InMemorySample->Messages Kafka (Connectors/Kafka) Kafka) Kafka (Connectors/Kafka)->Abstractions KafkaSample KafkaSample KafkaSample->Core KafkaSample->Kafka (Connectors/Kafka) KafkaSample->Messages Messages->Abstractions Messages->Core NATS (Connectors/NATS) NATS) NATS (Connectors/NATS)->Abstractions NATSSample NATSSample NATSSample->Core NATSSample->Messages NATSSample->NATS (Connectors/NATS) __more__ +19 more projects

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.

53 modules, with 152 dependencies between them. 2 loops run through 12 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 13 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →1 MQContract.Interfaces.Encoding2 MQContract.Interfaces.Messages3 MQContract.Messages4 MQContract.Interfaces.Encrypting5 MQContract.Interfaces.Factories6 MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware7 MQContract.Interfaces.Service8 MQContract.Interfaces9 MQContract10 BenchMark11 MQContract.ActiveMQ12 MQContract.AmazonSNQS13 MQContract.ApachePulsar14 MQContract.AzureServiceBus15 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Query16 MQContract.Extensions17 MQContract.Factories18 MQContract.GooglePubSub19 MQContract.HiveMQ20 MQContract.InMemory21 MQContract.Interfaces.Consumers22 MQContract.Kafka23 MQContract.Middleware.Metrics24 MQContract.NATS25 MQContract.RabbitMQ26 MQContract.Redis27 MQContract.ZeroMQ28 MQContract.CQRS.Consumers29 MQContract.Middleware30 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces31 MQContract.Connections32 MQContract.CQRS33 MQContract.CQRS.Registrars34 MQContract.Subscriptions35 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command36 BenchMark.Messages37 MQContract.CQRS.Contexts38 MQContract.CQRS.Extensions39 BenchMark.InMemoryBenchmarks40 BenchMark.PublishBenchmarks
1 MQContract.Interfaces.Encoding
2 MQContract.Interfaces.Messages1
3 MQContract.Messages112
4 MQContract.Interfaces.Encrypting1
5 MQContract.Interfaces.Factories12
6 MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware4
7 MQContract.Interfaces.Service11
8 MQContract.Interfaces15221
9 MQContract3273127
10 BenchMark1
11 MQContract.ActiveMQ632
12 MQContract.AmazonSNQS722
13 MQContract.ApachePulsar522
14 MQContract.AzureServiceBus531
15 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Query121
16 MQContract.Extensions3633
17 MQContract.Factories11211
18 MQContract.GooglePubSub522
19 MQContract.HiveMQ541
20 MQContract.InMemory1151
21 MQContract.Interfaces.Consumers442
22 MQContract.Kafka622
23 MQContract.Middleware.Metrics31
24 MQContract.NATS631
25 MQContract.RabbitMQ541
26 MQContract.Redis531
27 MQContract.ZeroMQ941
28 MQContract.CQRS.Consumers241442
29 MQContract.Middleware74291173
30 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces111321
31 MQContract.Connections5445261115123
32 MQContract.CQRS41121
33 MQContract.CQRS.Registrars2262
34 MQContract.Subscriptions64231
35 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command121
36 BenchMark.Messages1
37 MQContract.CQRS.Contexts31241
38 MQContract.CQRS.Extensions1121
39 BenchMark.InMemoryBenchmarks3125
40 BenchMark.PublishBenchmarks33112
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 MQContract.Interfaces.Encoding2 MQContract.Interfaces.Messages3 MQContract.Messages4 MQContract.Interfaces.Encrypting5 MQContract.Interfaces.Factories6 MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware7 MQContract.Interfaces.Service8 MQContract.Interfaces9 MQContract10 BenchMark11 MQContract.ActiveMQ12 MQContract.AmazonSNQS13 MQContract.ApachePulsar14 MQContract.AzureServiceBus15 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Query16 MQContract.Extensions17 MQContract.Factories18 MQContract.GooglePubSub19 MQContract.HiveMQ20 MQContract.InMemory21 MQContract.Interfaces.Consumers22 MQContract.Kafka23 MQContract.Middleware.Metrics24 MQContract.NATS25 MQContract.RabbitMQ26 MQContract.Redis27 MQContract.ZeroMQ28 MQContract.CQRS.Consumers29 MQContract.Middleware30 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces31 MQContract.Connections32 MQContract.CQRS33 MQContract.CQRS.Registrars34 MQContract.Subscriptions35 MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command36 BenchMark.Messages37 MQContract.CQRS.Contexts38 MQContract.CQRS.Extensions39 BenchMark.InMemoryBenchmarks40 BenchMark.PublishBenchmarksMQContract.Interfaces.Encoding1MQContract.Interfaces.Messages2MQContract.Messages3MQContract.Interfaces.Encrypting4MQContract.Interfaces.Factories5MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware6MQContract.Interfaces.Service7MQContract.Interfaces8MQContract9BenchMark10MQContract.ActiveMQ11MQContract.AmazonSNQS12MQContract.ApachePulsar13MQContract.AzureServiceBus14MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Query15MQContract.Extensions16MQContract.Factories17MQContract.GooglePubSub18MQContract.HiveMQ19MQContract.InMemory20MQContract.Interfaces.Consumers21MQContract.Kafka22MQContract.Middleware.Metrics23MQContract.NATS24MQContract.RabbitMQ25MQContract.Redis26MQContract.ZeroMQ27MQContract.CQRS.Consumers28MQContract.Middleware29MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces30MQContract.Connections31MQContract.CQRS32MQContract.CQRS.Registrars33MQContract.Subscriptions34MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command35BenchMark.Messages36MQContract.CQRS.Contexts37MQContract.CQRS.Extensions38BenchMark.InMemoryBenchmarks39BenchMark.PublishBenchmarks4011121124111522132731271632722522531121363311211522541115144262231631541531941241442742911731113215445261115123411212262642311211312411121312533112+13 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 70% · Adequate ·

The Good
D1 · .NET / C# Cyclomatic Complexity 9.6 D2 · .NET / C# Cognitive Complexity 8.4 D3 · .NET / C# God Classes 9.4 D4 · .NET / C# Code Duplication 9.6 D17 · .NET / C# Explicit Debt 8.9 D18 · .NET / C# Solution Shape 10.0 D39 · .NET / C# IL Efficiency 10.0 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 7.6 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 7.0 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X32 · Repo Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly 10.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 10.0 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 8.0
The Bad
X1 · Repo Async correctness 6.7 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 5.7 X3 · Repo Exception handling 5.3

At a glance — Architecture · 99% · Exemplary ·

The Good
D5 · .NET / C# Coupling 10.0 D6 · .NET / C# Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D26 · .NET / C# Project Cohesion 10.0 D27 · .NET / C# Navigability 7.8 D35 · .NET / C# Change Coupling 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0

At a glance — Maturity · 31% · Weak · gated by M2, M4 ·

The Good
D15 · .NET / C# Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D21 · .NET / C# Naming Consistency 8.0 D24 · .NET / C# Comment Value 9.0 D34 · .NET / C# Knowledge Freshness 10.0
The Bad
M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 5.8
The Ugly
M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 0.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 4.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 2.0

At a glance — Readiness · 58% · Adequate · gated by P3 ·

The Good
D8 · .NET / C# Code Coverage 10.0 D9 · .NET / C# Test Distribution 10.0 D10 · .NET / C# Test Quality 10.0 D12 · .NET / C# Dependency Hygiene 7.5 D13 · .NET / C# Secret Scanning 10.0 D14 · .NET / C# License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 9.0
The Bad
P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 5.0
The Ugly
P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 1.0

At a glance — Security · 36% · Weak · gated by C1 ·

The Good
D28 · .NET / C# Secrets (history) 10.0 D30 · .NET / C# Dependency Vulnerabilities 9.4 D44 · .NET / C# Platform End-of-Life 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0
The Bad
D29 · .NET / C# Static Analysis (SAST) 6.4 D32 · .NET / C# Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) 6.6
The Ugly
C1 · Repo Data Protection 0.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 2.7

At a glance — Performance · 81% · Strong ·

The Good
PF1 · Repo Benchmark discipline 9.5 PF2 · Repo Allocation hygiene 10.0
The Bad
PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 6.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A05:2025 — Injection9High / Critical
A01:2025 — Broken Access Control4Medium
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures1High / Critical

Roadmap

First, secure sensitive data by implementing encryption at rest and managing keys in a vault, unless this is already handled by infrastructure. Next, establish clear architectural governance by documenting significant design decisions in a dedicated folder and aligning the README with the actual codebase to resolve installation and link errors. Finally, improve code organization by grouping production code under a src directory and update the README to clearly explain how to run the test suite.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (ASP.NET Core Data Protection / column encryption) and manage keys in a vault. Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).+8.5 ptsMediumData Protection
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.+6.4 ptsMediumArchitecture documentation
Reconcile the README with reality: README.md installs the package `MQContract.Abstractions` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Abstractions`), but no project or props file references it; README.md installs the package `MQContract.Core` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Core`), but no project or props file references it; README.md installs the package `MQContract.InMemory` (`dotnet add package MQContract.InMemory`), but no project or props file references it; README.md links to `/Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md`, but `Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md` does not exist.+4.7 ptsMediumDocumentation accuracy
Resolve the 1 The spelling 'Recieved' is used in two different classes for the same… finding(s) in Naming Consistency.+2.3 ptsLowNaming Consistency
Resolve the 1 The word 'Resilience' is spelled inconsistently finding(s) in Naming Consistency.+2.3 ptsLowNaming Consistency
Resolve the 1 redundant comment finding(s) in Comment Value — start with KafkaConnectorTests.cs.+2.3 ptsLowComment Value
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.+3.5 ptsMediumFolder & project structure
Resolve the 4 REDACTED finding(s) in Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED.+1.7 ptsLowData Compliance (PII/GDPR)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 47 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 0% slop · 53% mixed · 47% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED4.6MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED5.8MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED6.3MixedData Compliance (PII/GDPR): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED7.2MixedDependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cyclomatic 21)
Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs7.4MixedCode Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 2)
CQRS/Consumers/CancellationRequestConsumer.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Connectors/ActiveMQ/Connection.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Connectors/AmazonSNQS/Subscription.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Connectors/ApachePulsar/Subscription.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Connectors/Kafka/Subscription.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Core/Helpers/ConsumerConnectionHelper.cs7.6MixedExplicit Debt: EmptyCatchBlock
Core/Connections/AConnection.cs7.8MixedGod Classes: TooManyMethods: AConnection
Core/MessageContext.MessageTypes.cs7.8MixedGod Classes: TooManyMethods: MessageContext
Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs7.8MixedCode Duplication: Duplicated block (15 lines × 2)
Testing/Core/CoreTesting.csproj7.8MixedDependency Hygiene: Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter
Testing/CQRSTesting/CQRSTesting.csproj7.8MixedDependency Hygiene: Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter
Testing/CodeGenTesting/CodeGenTesting.csproj7.8MixedDependency Hygiene: Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter

How the grades work

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

Critical — 18

A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here tends to cause failures elsewhere.

Serious — 127

Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to carry for two years either.

Minor — 73

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

Could not be resolved — 7

Something this survey could not settle from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each one is named under Limitations.

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 69 of 72 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 72 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D8D9D10D12D13D14D15D17D18D21D24D26D27D28D29D30D32D34D35D39D44AX10AX3AX4AX5AX6AX8C1GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P6PF1PF2PF3X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X32X4X5

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, 166 of 218 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
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)Code duplication1.0.0✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.400✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.400✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivySecrets 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 01a161d5-2e7c-7bff-a819-048d6e533b7e.

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.

  • D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test reliability not included — no test tier completed within its budget.
  • D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable (1 contributor(s) across 61 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). Concentration needs a team to concentrate: with one contributor there is nobody to spread the knowledge to, so there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
  • 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.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. `Abstractions/Attributes/ConsumerAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/MQContractMessageContextAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/MessageAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/QueryMessageAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Exceptions.cs`, … (+47 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 75 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 115.

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 — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
  • D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the test suite inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • 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.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR): PII/GDPR signals are heuristic pattern matches in code — they flag likely handling concerns, not legal compliance, and cannot trace where data actually flows at runtime.
  • 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.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • 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.
  • P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (3): D21, D24, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.6 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was MessageContextGenerator.Generate at 21. A further 1 method(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being Connection.Connection.ctor at 21 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 1 file carries no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of its over-threshold methods was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: Connectors/GooglePubSub/Connection.cs (Connection.Connection.ctor at 21). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cyclomatic 21)Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:56

What to do

  1. Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cyclomatic 21). — Refactoring it lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.6 to about 10.0/10.
  2. Enforce Cyclomatic Complexity in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D2 · Cognitive Complexity8.4 / 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

1 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was MessageContextGenerator.Generate at 66.

MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cognitive 66)Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:56

What to do

  1. Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cognitive 66). — Refactoring it lifts Cognitive Complexity from 8.4 to about 10.0/10.
  2. 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 Classes9.4 / 10Stronggated by 3 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

3 god class(es) detected.

TooManyMethods: AConnection · ×2Core/Connections/AConnection.cs
FileTooLong: Connections/AConnection.csCore/Connections/AConnection.cs

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with AConnection.cs, MessageContext.MessageTypes.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with AConnection.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D4 · Code Duplication9.6 / 10Stronggated by 13 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

13 duplicated block group(s) detected.

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×3Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:68
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×2Core/Connections/MappedConnection.cs:89
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×2Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:36
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2)Core/MessageContext.MessageTypes.cs:75
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2)Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:56

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with MessageMapper.cs, MessageContextGenerator.cs, Connection.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with MappedConnection.cs, ResiliencePolicy.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with MessageMapper.cs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  4. Enforce Code Duplication in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D5 · Coupling10.0 / 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 52 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

D8 · Code Coverage10.0 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Line coverage 95.9% — 1 file(s) below 50%.

Low coverage: Abstractions/MQContractMessageContext.csAbstractions/MQContractMessageContext.cs:1

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Low coverage finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with MQContractMessageContext.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Enforce Code Coverage in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1442 test methods: 1362 unit, 80 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

D10 · Test Quality10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

0 skipped, 0 zero-assertion, 3 mock references across 721 tests.

Mock-dominated test: CheckRegistrationUsingGenericsAndSuppliedInstanceWithParameters · ×10Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/Consumers/PubSubAsyncConsumerTests.cs:102
Mock framework: Moq · ×3

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D12 · Dependency Hygiene7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

32 outdated, 0 vulnerable, 2 deprecated packages.

Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter · ×10Testing/Core/CoreTesting.csproj:17
Outdated: Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp · ×32

What to do

  1. Resolve the 10 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with CoreTesting.csproj (2), CQRSTesting.csproj (2), CodeGenTesting.csproj (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (10 warning-level).
  2. 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

0 of 329 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 43 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 207 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution.

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt8.9 / 10Adequategated by 8 critical findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

8 deducted debt markers + 6 dead symbols across 15180 LoC in the .NET projects (0.6/KLoC) → score 8.9.

EmptyCatchBlock · ×8CQRS/Consumers/CancellationRequestConsumer.cs:25
Dead code: BasicMessageToNameAndVersionMessage · ×6Testing/Core/Converters/BasicMessageToNameAndVersionMessage.cs:6

What to do

  1. Resolve the 8 EmptyCatchBlock finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with Connection.cs (3), Subscription.cs (3), CancellationRequestConsumer.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 6 Dead code finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with BasicMessageToNameAndVersionMessage.cs, NoChannelMessageToBasicMessage.cs, MoqExtensions.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  3. Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D18 · Solution Shape10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

76 projects, 1063 source files, 48207 hand-written lines of code (15180 production / 33027 test — the split is derived per file: test is what its project, its own path, or a compile-guarded region marks as test, and a file carrying no test signal counts as production), 131 inter-project edges.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md.

D21 · Naming ConsistencyStrong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

2 naming inconsistencies across 200 sampled symbols.

The spelling 'Recieved' is used in two different classes for the same concept (handling an error). This is a consistent misspelling of 'Received', but it represents a deviation from standard English spelling conventions. While consistent within itself, it is a naming error that should be corrected to 'Received' for correctness.
The word 'Resilience' is spelled inconsistently: 'Resilliance' (with double 'l') in the method name `GetResilliancePolicy` versus the correct spelling 'Resilience' in the field name `queryPolicies` (of type `ResiliencePolicy`) and the type name `ResiliencePolicy`. This is a typo in the method name.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 The spelling 'Recieved' is used in two different classes for the same… finding(s) in Naming Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 The word 'Resilience' is spelled inconsistently finding(s) in Naming Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D24 · Comment ValueExemplary◐ 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: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

46 valuable / 1 redundant across 200 sampled comments; 1 shown with locations.

redundant commentTesting/ConnectorTesting/Kafka/KafkaConnectorTests.cs:41

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 46 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md.

D27 · Navigability7.8 / 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. C# also names each pass-through layer (a class whose every public method only forwards its own parameters to one collaborator) as a located finding; the score is not affected.

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

76 % of calls cross a namespace and 3 % go through an interface, but 75 % of collaborators are co-located — so following a call takes several hops. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

Pass-through layer · ×2CQRS/Registrars/ContractedConnectionRegistrar.cs:8

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Pass-through layer finding(s) in Navigability — start with ContractedConnectionRegistrar.cs, MappedConnectionRegistrar.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d27_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

Method: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)6.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

9 finding(s): 0 critical, 7 high, 2 medium, 0 low. 5 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 57 file(s) — `Abstractions/Attributes/ConsumerAttribute.cs` (line 23), `Abstractions/Attributes/MQContractMessageContextAttribute.cs` (line 10), `Abstractions/Attributes/MessageAttribute.cs` (line 20), `Abstractions/Attributes/QueryMessageAttribute.cs` (lines 16–17, line 17, line 18), `Abstractions/Exceptions.cs` (lines 1–38, line 43, lines 49–50), … (+52 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. In 57 of those file(s) — `Abstractions/Attributes/ConsumerAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/MQContractMessageContextAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/MessageAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/QueryMessageAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Exceptions.cs`, … (+52 more) — the break is a C# primary constructor, which semgrep's grammar cannot parse and which hides the type from every rule scoped to it; those files were re-scanned from a shadow copy with the constructor's parameter list blanked (line and column preserving), which restores the type to the rules, and 0 additional row(s) came from that pass. Only the header's own parameter list is unread in them.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  3. No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 5 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities9.4 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)6.6 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Likely personal-data (PII / GDPR) handling concerns — logging or storing data without safeguards.

Method: Heuristic PII/GDPR LEAK scan via semgrep across the repo, using Watchdog's own ruleset: personal data crossing a boundary it should not — reaching a log/console sink, a URL or query string, or unprotected browser storage. Matches map to severity and a 0-10 wide normalizer. A clean sweep is unscored rather than an unearned 10, and is a statement about the leak paths checked only — this dimension does not inventory the personal data a repository holds (the personal-data map and the C1-C5 compliance cards do that), so it never reports that a repository has no personal-data surface. Reported LOUDLY as a measurement gap if the ruleset is missing from the analyzer image. Exhaustive over the leak paths, advisory-leaning; degrades on parse failure.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

4 finding(s): 0 critical, 0 high, 4 medium, 0 low. semgrep could not parse 52 file(s) — `Abstractions/Attributes/ConsumerAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/MQContractMessageContextAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/MessageAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Attributes/QueryMessageAttribute.cs`, `Abstractions/Exceptions.cs`, … (+47 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.

REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 REDACTED finding(s) in Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d32_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

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

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

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

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

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 78 of the 238 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.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. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 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.

D39 · IL Efficiency10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Method: IL instruction count per method, read from the BUILT first-party assemblies via Mono.Cecil (the target is compiled on a deep run); scored on the fraction of methods whose emitted IL body exceeds the size threshold. Sees compiler-generated bloat source can't; not-applicable when the target fails to build. Deterministic.

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

0 of 327 first-party methods have an oversized IL body.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d39_recommendation.md.

D44 · Platform End-of-Life10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether anyone still ships security patches for the platform this repository RUNS ON — the runtime it pins and the framework majors its own constraints hold it to. Separate from D12 because the question differs: a current Django on an end-of-life Python is perfectly up to date and completely unsupported, and the fix is a migration rather than a version bump. What the repository says it merely SUPPORTS is never charged.

Method: End-of-life PLATFORM read from the repository's own declarations and graded against a FROZEN, dated table of vendor support dates — no network, no feed, no API, so this dimension answers identically inside a closed scan fence. Two subjects: a RUNTIME the project pins (a single or all-end-of-life TargetFramework, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a requires-python CAP) and a FRAMEWORK major a dependency constraint cannot move off (a caret, tilde or exact version; `vue@^2.7.16` pins Vue 2). A FLOOR is deliberately never charged — `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what a package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on — and a multi-target project is charged only when EVERY target is out of support. Runtime 4.0/product capped 8.0, framework 1.5 capped 4.5. The table is safe to freeze because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false: it loses recall as it ages, never precision, and a test asserts every entry predates the freeze date. Disjoint from D31 (a container image's OS layer) and D29 (the toolchain a CI workflow installs). Abstains when the repository declares no platform this pass reads — never scores it clean.

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 31 platform declaration(s) and 0 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does.

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

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

What to do

  • The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
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.

  • The namespaces MQContract ↔ MQContract.Interfaces ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Encrypting ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Messages ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Service ↔ MQContract.Messages depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is MQContract → MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware (MQContract.MQContractMessageContext → MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware.MessageContextDefintion, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — Abstractions/MQContractMessageContext.cs:5
  • The namespaces MQContract.CQRS ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Consumers ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Query depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is MQContract.CQRS → MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command (MQContract.CQRS.CqrsConnection → MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command.ICommandProcessor, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — CQRS/CqrsConnection.cs:3

What to do

  • Break namespace cycles inside a project by moving the shared type to a namespace both sides can use, or by inverting the back edge behind an interface.
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 declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.

AX8 · Test isolation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ 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.

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.
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 & stubs7.6 / 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, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

  • `PublishMessageAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work. — Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:172
  • `PingAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work. — Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:199
  • `GetAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work. — Core/Connections/ServiceConnectionList.cs:35

What to do

  • Remove the dead code that still moves this score: delete dead if(false) / #if false branches and either do the real async work or drop the async keyword from fake-async methods.
M1 · Documentation (README)5.8 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

  • 320 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.

What to do

  • Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
  • Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
  • Add a README to the 31 of 46 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.3 pts.
  • Review the README against recent changes; refresh the parts that drifted.
M2 · Architecture documentation0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
  • No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.

What to do

  • Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
  • Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
M3 · Folder & project structure4.0 / 10Weak✓ 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.

  • Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
  • Tests aren't grouped in a dedicated test folder — the test surface isn't separable from production code at a glance.
  • Only 16/46 projects share a common root namespace — the code's module identity is inconsistent.

What to do

  • Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
  • Group tests in the folder your build system expects (tests/, test/, spec/, or your module's test source set) so the test surface is discoverable and CI can scope it.
  • Adopt a consistent root-namespace convention (a shared prefix, e.g. Acme.*); short project-file/directory names are fine as long as the RootNamespace is uniform.
M4 · Documentation accuracy2.0 / 10Critical◐ 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.

  • README.md installs the package `MQContract.Abstractions` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Abstractions`), but no project or props file references it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — README.md:21
  • README.md installs the package `MQContract.Core` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Core`), but no project or props file references it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — README.md:22
  • README.md installs the package `MQContract.InMemory` (`dotnet add package MQContract.InMemory`), but no project or props file references it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — README.md:23
  • README.md links to `/Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md`, but `Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — README.md:96

What to do

  • Reconcile the README with reality: README.md installs the package `MQContract.Abstractions` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Abstractions`), but no project or props file references it; README.md installs the package `MQContract.Core` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Core`), but no project or props file references it; README.md installs the package `MQContract.InMemory` (`dotnet add package MQContract.InMemory`), but no project or props file references it; README.md links to `/Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md`, but `Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md` does not exist.
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 · Observability9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

P3 · Security & performance tooling1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 6723 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

What to do

  • Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)

What to do

  • Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
PF1 · Benchmark discipline9.5 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code protects its performance with benchmarks — a benchmark suite, allocation/memory measurement, 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; off .NET, the same ladder over Go testing.B, Rust criterion/#[bench]/divan, JMH/kotlinx-benchmark, pytest-benchmark/asv/pyperf, tinybench/mitata/vitest bench/benchmark.js and Swift package-benchmark — scored as a bonus ladder (absence is neutral, never a deduction). Deterministic, presence detection.

PF2 · Allocation hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether the code is written to minimise allocations so it doesn't pressure its host's memory manager — buffer/slice views over copies, object pooling, stack or value-type allocation, 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 — in .NET Span/Memory, ArrayPool/ObjectPool, stackalloc, ValueTask, value-type structs, IBufferWriter, string.Create, SkipLocalsInit; off .NET, with comments and strings blanked, Go's sync.Pool, preallocated slices/maps, Grow, strconv.Append* and buf[:0] reuse; the JVM's NIO buffer views, MemorySegment, primitive collections, pools and literal presizes (plus Kotlin primitive arrays and value classes, Scala AnyVal and @specialized); Swift's reserveCapacity, ContiguousArray, withUnsafe* access and ~Copyable. Activated off .NET on the same floor (400 lines, and benchmarks or 8 uses); Rust and garbage-collected scripting languages are not applicable. Reward-only. Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code stays responsive — it avoids sync-over-async blocking (a .NET .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult(), a time.sleep or blocking HTTP call inside a Python coroutine, a *Sync call inside an async JavaScript function, block_on inside a Rust async fn, runBlocking inside a Kotlin suspend function, block() inside a Reactor publisher) that stalls a thread or event loop and risks deadlock, and, where the code is a reusable library on .NET, awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) so it never captures and stalls its caller's context.

Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking counted everywhere — .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in .NET; off .NET, read from the language model, a blocking call inside an async function (Python, TS/JS, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, Dart) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux or a Scala method returning a Future or effect — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

  • 9 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • `tsk.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). — Core/Utility.cs:35
  • `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). (×4) — Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs:46, BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:45, BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:46, …
  • `connectionTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). — Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:38
  • `channelTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). — Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:41
  • `connectTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). — Connectors/HiveMQ/Connection.cs:37
  • `subTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). — BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:38

What to do

  • Make the call chain async end-to-end and await it — never block on a Task with .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult().
X1 · Async correctness6.7 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

  • Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout. (×3) — Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:447, Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:611, Core/Utility.cs:25
  • `ManualResetEventSlim.Wait` parks the thread until another thread signals it — inside a method that is already `async`, the wait should be awaitable (a `TaskCompletionSource`, `SemaphoreSlim.WaitAsync`, or `WaitHandle` bridged with `Task.Factory.FromAsync`). (×2) — Core/Subscriptions/QueryResponseSubscription.cs:96, Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:209
  • Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process. (×8) — Core/Utility.cs:35, Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs:46, Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:38, …

What to do

  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result`
X12 · Unreachable branch10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether any branch is dead by construction — a switch arm whose label can never equal a case-normalised subject, or an `else if` whose predicate the arm above has already swallowed.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: switch labels compared against the subject's own case normaliser, and if/else-if chains checked for a literal an earlier arm's containment test already swallows. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X13 · Undrained process stream10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a child process that has BOTH standard streams redirected drains both — reading one to the end while the other is never read deadlocks once the child fills the unread pipe.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: ProcessStartInfo launches with both streams redirected, checked for a drain of each stream across the enclosing type. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `spawn` imported from `child_process` whose stdout and stderr are both pipes (no options, no `stdio`, or `stdio` of `'pipe'`), bound to a local that never leaves its scope, where exactly one of the two streams is read, the other never, and the child’s `close`/`exit` (or the read stream’s end) is awaited; a shell redirect in the call’s arguments or a `kill` of the child suppresses it. The same rule reads Python’s `subprocess.Popen`, Dart’s `Process.start`, Ruby’s `Open3.popen3`, and Scala’s JDK process starts (`new ProcessBuilder(…).start()` with no `redirectErrorStream`/`redirectError`/`redirectOutput`/`inheritIO`, `Runtime.getRuntime.exec`) where one of `getInputStream`/`getErrorStream` is read and the other never while `waitFor()` is called or the read stream is read to its end. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X14 · Bypassable address classification10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader2.7 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

  • `len` is read from the stream being parsed at line 22 (`ReadInt32`), then read in bulk from that same stream at line 23 — and nowhere in this method is `len` bounded from above — compared to a limit, clamped, or checked against the input that remains (a zero or sign test, or the loop that counts up to it, bounds nothing). A file the caller did not write therefore chooses the size directly: a value near `int.MaxValue` allocates until the process dies, and a value that overflows the cast to `int` goes negative and throws out of a parser whose failure path was written for malformed input, not for hostile input. Bound `len` against the bytes actually remaining in the stream before spending it. — Connectors/ZeroMQ/MessageMapper.cs:23
  • `len` is read from the stream being parsed at line 25 (`ReadInt32`), then read in bulk from that same stream at line 26 — and nowhere in this method is `len` bounded from above — compared to a limit, clamped, or checked against the input that remains (a zero or sign test, or the loop that counts up to it, bounds nothing). A file the caller did not write therefore chooses the size directly: a value near `int.MaxValue` allocates until the process dies, and a value that overflows the cast to `int` goes negative and throws out of a parser whose failure path was written for malformed input, not for hostile input. Bound `len` against the bytes actually remaining in the stream before spending it. — Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:26

What to do

  • Each finding names the read that takes the length from the input and the site that spends it, and states that the value is never compared in between. Confirm from the two, then bound the length against the remaining stream before using it.
X16 · Unfloored truncation loop10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a walk that recurses through a JSON/XML tree handed in by its caller bounds how deep it will go — an uncapped walk lets the document's nesting choose the stack depth, and the resulting StackOverflowException cannot be caught.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that take a JSON/XML document node and call themselves with a child of it, reachable from an externally-callable member of the same type that accepts a document, checked for any depth parameter, descent counter or threaded arithmetic anywhere in the walk. On a repository with no .NET source it reads TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths and `.d.ts` not) with the same rule: a function or method with a parameter typed as a document value — `unknown`, `any`, `object`, `Record<string, unknown|any>`, a JSON alias (`JsonValue`, `JSONObject`, …) or a DOM node global the file does not rebind — that calls itself (bare, or through `this` for a method, or hands itself to a call over the value as in `value.map(walk)`) with something it took out of that value and never through an ancestor accessor such as `closest()` or `parentElement`, that is exported or reached from an exported function (a public method of the same exported class) taking such a value, and that names no depth, level, nesting, recursion, remaining or budget anywhere and threads no `+`/`-` arithmetic through a self-call. Plain JavaScript is not read: with no annotation nothing tells a parsed document from a tree the code built itself. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness5.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether a type's disposal matches what it OWNS — releasing what it created, leaving alone what it was handed, and not declaring a finalizer for state that has nothing unmanaged to finalize.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: every assignment to a disposable field is read to decide whether the type CREATED the value or was handed it, and the type's disposal is checked against that answer — an injected interface it disposes, a value it constructed and never releases, a finalizer on a type holding nothing unmanaged, and a disposable local whose every reference is a plain member read. A value handed to a container that disposes its contents (a parent control's `Controls` collection, a component `IContainer`) is released by that container and is not reported; generated code is out of population. On a repository with no .NET source the same ownership questions are read in JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not): a class declaring `dispose()`, `[Symbol.dispose]()` or `[Symbol.asyncDispose]()` that disposes a field it was handed through a constructor parameter typed as a repository interface or resolved by a dependency-injection container; that assigns a field only ever from `new X(…)` of a disposable class and neither releases it anywhere in the class nor names it in its disposal member or a method that member calls, nor hands it to anything else; and a `const`/`let` local built from literals only whose every reference opens a statement operating on a non-release member of it. A class is disposable when every repository declaration of its name declares or inherits a disposal member, or when it is a documented library disposable (`vscode` EventEmitter, CancellationTokenSource and Disposable; three.js geometries, materials, textures, render targets, renderers, controls and composers). The finalizer arm has no JavaScript counterpart: a class cannot declare one. Dart is read for the owned-and-never-released arm: a Flutter `State` (or a class declaring `dispose()`/`close()`) whose library-private field is written only with direct creations of a framework controller, `FocusNode`, `StreamController` or periodic `Timer` (or a `.listen(…)` into a field declared `StreamSubscription`), which nothing in the class or its library releases (`dispose`/`close`/`cancel`) and which is never handed on except as a named argument. Ruby is read for the owned-and-never-released arm and the abandoned-local arm: a class declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose instance variable is written only with a blockless core descriptor creation (`File.open`/`new`, `Tempfile`, `Dir.open`, `IO.popen`, the `socket` and `openssl` socket classes) that no method of the class closes and that is never handed on (passed, returned, stored, exposed by `attr_reader`, delegated) — a class whose superclass or mixin lies outside the repository is not judged — and a blockless creation read through and dropped (`File.open(path).read`) or held in a local that is never closed, returned, passed or stored (a `&:read` block-pass, an `autoclose: false` borrow and a `fileno` hand-over are not abandonment). PHP is read for the same two arms: a class (not a trait, and not one using a trait) declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose `private` property (or a `final` class's `protected` one) is written only with a direct core `fopen`, `tmpfile`, `popen`, `proc_open`, `fsockopen`, `stream_socket_client`/`server` or `opendir` that nothing in the class closes (`fclose`, `pclose`, `closedir`, `unset`, a reset to `null`) and that is never handed on, and a handle held in a function's local, or read through as the argument of a reader, that is never closed, returned, passed, captured or stored; a `php://` stream, `curl_init`, `SplFileObject`, `PDO` and a function the repository declares under the core name are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

  • `zip` is a `BrotliStream`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 18). Every use of it in `AfterMessageEncodeAsync` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var zip = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw. — Core/Middleware/CompressionMiddleware.cs:18
  • `ConsumerInstance` declares a finalizer (line 37), but nothing in the type is unmanaged: no `IntPtr`/`UIntPtr` or pointer field, no `SafeHandle`, no `HandleRef`, no `extern`/`DllImport` member and no `Marshal`/`GCHandle`/`NativeMemory` use. A finalizer can only release what the garbage collector cannot, so on a purely-managed type it releases nothing and costs something: every instance is put on the finalizer queue, survives at least one extra collection, and is then finalized on a thread that is NOT the disposing one — where the managed objects it touches may already have been finalized themselves. Delete the finalizer (and the `GC.SuppressFinalize` that exists to defuse it); if a handle is added later, wrap it in a `SafeHandle`, which brings its own correct finalization. — Connectors/ActiveMQ/ConsumerInstance.cs:37
  • `messageConsumer` is never created by `ConsumerInstance` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 31). Its declared type `IMessageConsumer` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed. — Connectors/ActiveMQ/ConsumerInstance.cs:31
  • `Connection` implements `IDisposable` — so it has told every caller it holds something worth releasing — and it constructs `pingResponseEvent` itself (line 50), which makes that instance its own. But `pingResponseEvent` is named in none of the methods the disposal search covered: `DisposeAsync` (line 260) — that is `Dispose` plus every method `Dispose` calls BY NAME, so a release reached through an interface, a delegate or a base class is not followed and is worth checking before acting. On what was read, the type's disposal releases everything except the one thing it owns. A disposable the owner never disposes is held until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and forever if it does not — which for a synchronisation primitive, a timer, a stream or a handle means the resource accumulates once per instance for the life of the process. Release it in `Dispose` (`pingResponseEvent?.Dispose();`), or, if it truly does not need releasing, drop `IDisposable` from the type so the claim and the behaviour agree. — Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:50
  • `connectionMonitor` is a `NetMQMonitor`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 57). Every use of it in `SendMessageToDestination` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var connectionMonitor = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw. — Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:57
  • `Connection` implements `IDisposable` — so it has told every caller it holds something worth releasing — and it constructs `batchedMessageStream` itself (line 25), which makes that instance its own. But `batchedMessageStream` is named in none of the methods the disposal search covered: `DisposeAsync` (line 127) — that is `Dispose` plus every method `Dispose` calls BY NAME, so a release reached through an interface, a delegate or a base class is not followed and is worth checking before acting. On what was read, the type's disposal releases everything except the one thing it owns. A disposable the owner never disposes is held until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and forever if it does not — which for a synchronisation primitive, a timer, a stream or a handle means the resource accumulates once per instance for the life of the process. Release it in `Dispose` (`batchedMessageStream?.Dispose();`), or, if it truly does not need releasing, drop `IDisposable` from the type so the claim and the behaviour agree. — Connectors/AmazonSNQS/Connection.cs:25
  • `contractConnection` is never created by `CqrsConnection` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 174). Its declared type `IContractConnection` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed. — CQRS/CqrsConnection.cs:174

What to do

  • Each finding names the value and the span that decides who owns it — the `new` that created it, or the constructor parameter that handed it over. Confirm ownership from that span, then make the disposal match it: release what this type created, leave what it was injected with to whoever created THAT, and drop a finalizer whose type holds nothing unmanaged to release.
X19 · Unrestored process-global state10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X2 · Cancellation propagation7.0 / 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. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same question: every named async function that itself makes a request an AbortSignal can cancel (global `fetch`, axios and its file-local instances, ky, ofetch) counts, and it is compliant when its parameters or body name a signal or it hands one of its own parameters to the request as options; signatures a framework fixes (JSX event handlers, route and lifecycle exports, request-first handlers, `override`, `'use server'` modules, TanStack `mutationFn`) are exempt unless they take a signal. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

  • Only 118/229 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
  • No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×38) — Core/Connections/AConnection.Consumers.cs:42, Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:67, Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:104, …
  • No CancellationToken parameter — the body observes an ambient token instead (a field or a context object), so the work does stop on cancellation, but a caller cannot cancel this call independently of the owner that created that token. — Core/Subscriptions/QueryResponseSubscription.cs:90

What to do

  • Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.
X20 · Mistyped argument guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `ArgumentNullException` tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(p))` statements controlled by an `if`, whose condition is read for a test that is true of a NON-null `p` — an emptiness test that dereferences it (`p.Count == 0`, `!p.Any()`) or a BCL predicate documented true of the empty value (`string.IsNullOrEmpty(p)`). Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X21 · Side-effecting pattern guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X22 · Contradicted release guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.

Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.

Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X25 · Inert configuration knob10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.

Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X26 · Unsynchronised callback handoff10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.

Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `foreach` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is enumerating invalidates the enumerator it is holding, so the next `MoveNext` throws `InvalidOperationException` and the remaining items are never seen.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: `foreach` statements whose body calls a structural mutator (`Add`/`Remove`/`Clear`/`Insert`/…) on the very expression the loop is enumerating. Two arms. ARM A — the source is a concrete fragile BCL collection, or a live `Keys`/`Values` view over one, and the mutator resolves to that same collection's own member; concurrent and immutable collections and arrays are outside the population by construction, since their enumerators survive a structural change. ARM B — the source is an argument-less accessor CALL on a receiver whose body is in source: the accessor must return a stored field VERBATIM and a sibling member must structurally change that same field, both read off the implementations rather than from the members' names. A mutation the loop provably exits immediately after (`break`/`return`/`throw`/`goto`), or one written inside a nested loop or a lambda, is counted and never reported. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a condition that tests a value for emptiness indexes that same value only where the test holds — an `||` written one parenthesis too far to the left leaves an index access outside the guard beside it, so the empty case the guard exists to anticipate reaches the index and throws.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: the OUTERMOST `&&`/`||` of every boolean condition, read for a symbol the condition tests for emptiness (`string.IsNullOrEmpty`/`IsNullOrWhiteSpace`, a `Length`/`Count` comparison against a literal, `Any()`, a `Length`/`Count` pattern, or a comparison against `""`) and ALSO indexes. Each `symbol[...]` access is placed by a boolean-reachability walk from the access up to the outermost connective: an access is COVERED when some enclosing step has it in the right operand and the left operand, under the truth value that step forces, proves the symbol non-empty — a recursion over `&&`/`||` whose true- and false-directions are asymmetric. A finding needs BOTH an uncovered access and a covered one on the same symbol in the same condition, which is the agreeing twin that separates a misplaced parenthesis from an unrelated length test. Bare index accesses with no emptiness test in the condition are neither counted nor reported; a non-identifier receiver and a lambda nested inside the condition are outside the population. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X29 · Per-element action decided by a fixed element10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a decision taken once per element is taken ABOUT that element — a test inside a counted loop that reads a fixed subscript of the very collection its guarded statement indexes by the loop variable applies element zero's answer to all of them, so the elements that differ from it are all handled wrongly, and in the same direction.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every `for` statement declaring exactly ONE loop variable, and every `if` inside its body that is not under a nested loop or a lambda. A site enters the population when the `if`’s condition never mentions the loop variable while the statement it guards indexes some collection by that variable ALONE (`c[i]`; `c[i + 1]` and `c[i, j]` are outside it). A finding additionally needs the AGREEING TWIN at the same-collection grain: the condition must read THAT SAME collection at a subscript that does not move — written into the condition, or reached through a local declared BEFORE the loop, so an alias bound inside the body is not followed. Both collection expressions must be simple identifiers. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `for (let|var|const x = …; …; …)` with one declarator and a braced body, an alias followed only when it is declared before the loop in a block that encloses it and never assigned inside the loop. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X3 · Exception handling5.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×6) — Core/Helpers/ConsumerConnectionHelper.cs:103, Connectors/Kafka/Subscription.cs:48, Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:201, …
  • An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. On a teardown path letting it propagate is not an option (throwing out of `Dispose()` masks the failure already in flight and abandons the rest of the cleanup), so make the swallow deliberate instead: record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems — or, if one specific failure truly cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch (a comment on a catch-all still swallows everything else). (×2) — Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs:279, Connectors/ActiveMQ/Connection.cs:209
  • `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch. (×2) — Connectors/Kafka/Middleware/SchemaValidationMiddleware.cs:155, Connectors/GooglePubSub/Connection.cs:138

What to do

  • Swallowed exception (empty catch)
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X32 · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a plugin lookup names the type it means — searching every assembly loaded into the process for a candidate whose SIMPLE name equals a string supplied at runtime, and taking the first one found, is decided by assembly LOAD ORDER rather than by this source, so the same name can resolve to a different type on the next run.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every invocation of `First`/`FirstOrDefault`/`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` whose OWN expression subtree contains both a `GetAssemblies()` call and a `GetTypes()`/`GetExportedTypes()` call — a single-element pick out of every type loaded into the process. A nested selector in the same chain sees no `GetAssemblies()` in its own subtree and is outside the population, so one lookup counts once however many links its chain has. A finding additionally needs both remaining halves: the selector must be `First`/`FirstOrDefault` (`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` reports the ambiguity rather than resolving it, and is counted and never reported), and the chain must carry an `==` comparison of `<lambda parameter>.Name` against something that is not a literal. The receiver must be a plain identifier bound by one of the chain’s own lambdas, which places `assembly.GetName().Name == "X"` outside the rule by construction. One exemption: a `.Name` test joined by `&&` to a `FullName`/`AssemblyQualifiedName` test on the same identifier is spared; joined by `||` it is not. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X4 · Structured logging10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal`/`verbose`/`silly`/`http`/`log` call on a receiver named for a logger, in a package whose own or an enclosing `package.json` declares a logger that carries values as fields (pino, pino-http, nestjs-pino, Fastify, winston, bunyan, tslog, LogTape, roarr), whose first deciding argument is a template literal with substitutions; an object-literal fields argument is stepped over, a plain string message clears the call. Python is read the same way: a `debug`/`info`/`warning`/`error`/`exception`/`critical`/`log` call on a logger in a file that imports the standard library’s `logging` or structlog (loguru, which formats at the call, is not judged), whose message is a whole f-string with a non-constant field; a `%`-formatted, `.format()`-ed or concatenated message is not convicted, as in C#. PHP is read the same way: a PSR-3 level call (`emergency`…`debug`, `log`) on a logger (`$logger`, `$this->logger`, Laravel’s `Log::`, `logger()`, `\Drupal::logger()`) in a package whose `composer.json` requires a PSR-3 logger or a framework that hands one out (psr/log, Monolog, Laravel, Symfony, Drupal, CakePHP), or a file that imports one, whose message is a double-quoted string interpolating a variable; a single-quoted message clears the call, and `sprintf` or `.` concatenation is not convicted, as in C#. Dart is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on Sentry’s structured logger (`Sentry.logger`) whose message is a whole string literal interpolating a value (`$name`, `${…}`); the `Sentry.logger.fmt` template API clears the call. Dart that logs only through loggers with one message and no fields (package:logging, package:logger, talker, dart:developer) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Ruby is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on the console gem’s `Console` (declared by a Gemfile, gemspec or Gemfile.lock, or required) or, where SemanticLogger, Ougai or dry-logger is declared or required, on a receiver named for a logger (`logger`, `@logger`, `Rails.logger`, `log`), whose first deciding argument is, as the whole argument, a double-quoted string interpolating a non-constant value (`#{…}`, `#@ivar`); a plain literal clears the call, keyword arguments are the fields, and a block, `%`-format or `+` concatenation is not convicted. Ruby that logs only through the standard Logger (Rails.logger) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Deterministic.

X5 · Nullable reference types8.0 / 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.

  • ~2.6 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 200 suppression(s) across the 78405 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). 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 Health70%AdequateAcceptable, with room to improve.
Architecture99%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Maturity31%Weak — gated by M2, M4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness58%Adequate — gated by P3Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security36%Weak — gated by C1Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance81%StrongSolid.
Unscored — 4 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.

  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — 1 observation(s) recorded · Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X10 Duplicated predicate — 2 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — 6 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 5 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.

  • C3 Audit Trail — Repo shows no audit-logging mechanism (IAuditable, an immutable audit log, an EF SaveChanges interceptor) for sensitive changes — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Record an audit trail in code (or document where it lives) so this dimension can be scored.
  • C4 Data Retention — Repo shows no data-retention / TTL / cleanup mechanism for personal data — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Define retention periods and a purge/cleanup job (or TTL) in code, or document where retention is enforced, so this dimension can be scored.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Repo shows no corroborated data-subject-rights mechanism (erasure / export-portability / consent) tied to a subject id or GDPR vocabulary — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Implement erasure, data export/portability and consent tracking over the subject's records.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
  • P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 39 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

  • AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
  • AX1 Captive dependencies — no DI registrations detected
  • AX2 Stateful singletons — no singleton implementations detected
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — This repository has nothing the runtime tiers could boot or serve — no markup, no UI framework or web-server dependency, no UI component source, no native UI project and no API definition — nothing here is a surface to boot — so runtime a11y/egress/header evidence has no subject here. Not applicable: this is neither a gap in the scan nor a finding about your code.
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — no web/app surface to authorize (no HTTP API or web-UI project) and no authorization code at all (no [Authorize]/policies, no imperative guard methods). Access control is therefore N/A here — this is a library/CLI, which is authorized by its CALLER, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included
  • D16 Bus Factor — single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable
  • D19 Documentation Quality — LLM evaluation failed
  • D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — small single-context codebase (15,180 production LoC in the .NET projects) — bounded contexts are not needed at this size No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — The CI pipeline builds and tests but publishes no released artifact — no package publish, container push, GitHub release or deployment step. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM attest RELEASED artifacts, so there is nothing to attest here. Add them to the release pipeline when this repo starts shipping artifacts (a published package, a container image, a deployed service or a tagged release). Build integrity and workflow-token hygiene are reported below: they describe what the CI runs and the token it runs with, neither of which is affected by whether the pipeline ships an artifact.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (6 value object(s))
  • ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (a message-bus package)
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — this isn't a service/API/worker
  • P8 Schema migrations — no EF Core usage detected
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — coverage data present for 121 file(s), but no domain-layer files were identified: no covered file's path contains any of the markers this check keys on (/domain/, /aggregates/, /valueobjects/, /domainmodel/, .domain/, /entities/), which are matched case-insensitively anywhere in the path. With no domain partition there is nothing to compare the web/controller layer against — if this repository keeps its business rules under a folder named none of those, that naming is what the check cannot see, not the domain logic.
  • S1 Web-Security Posture — No web surface detected in the analyzed source — no HTTP API or web-UI project (no controllers/minimal-API endpoints, no Razor/Blazor views) and no web middleware (HTTPS redirection, HSTS, security headers, cookies). Transport security, security headers, secure cookies, CSRF/input-validation and middleware-order controls are therefore N/A here — this is a library/CLI/worker, not a web app. Crypto hygiene was still checked and found nothing to flag. If this codebase becomes web-facing, the dimension reactivates automatically.
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 18 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · EmptyCatchBlock · ×8
  • EmptyCatchBlock CQRS/Consumers/CancellationRequestConsumer.cs:25 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock Connectors/ActiveMQ/Connection.cs:209 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock Connectors/AmazonSNQS/Subscription.cs:41 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock Connectors/ApachePulsar/Subscription.cs:61 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock Connectors/Kafka/Subscription.cs:48 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs:279 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:201 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
  • EmptyCatchBlock Core/Helpers/ConsumerConnectionHelper.cs:103 — empty catch block — the error is discarded with nothing recorded, so a failure here leaves no trace anywhere. Record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate. Where swallowing one specific failure really is correct — as it often is on a teardown/dispose path where throwing would mask the original failure — catch exactly that exception type and write down WHY in a comment on the catch. Both are needed: a comment on a catch-all still swallows every failure nobody anticipated, and a note that only restates the swallow ("ignored", "do nothing") is read as no explanation at all.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AX3 · Project dependency cycles · Namespace dependency cycle · ×2
  • Namespace dependency cycle Abstractions/MQContractMessageContext.cs:5 — The namespaces MQContract ↔ MQContract.Interfaces ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Encrypting ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Messages ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware ↔ MQContract.Interfaces.Service ↔ MQContract.Messages depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is MQContract → MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware (MQContract.MQContractMessageContext → MQContract.Interfaces.Middleware.MessageContextDefintion, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
  • Namespace dependency cycle CQRS/CqrsConnection.cs:3 — The namespaces MQContract.CQRS ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Consumers ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command ↔ MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Query depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is MQContract.CQRS → MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command (MQContract.CQRS.CqrsConnection → MQContract.CQRS.Interfaces.Command.ICommandProcessor, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×1
  • REDACTED
Serious — 127 finding(s)
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken · ×38
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RegisterMessageContextAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.Consumers.cs:42 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: RegisterMiddlewareInstanceAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:67 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: BeforeMessageEncodeAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:104 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: AfterMessageEncodeAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:118 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: BeforeMessageDecodeAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:128 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: AfterMessageDecodeAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:139 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: ProduceServiceMessageAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:153 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: DecodeServiceMessageAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:164 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: ProduceResultAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:449 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: CloseAsync Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:690 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GetConnectionsAsync Core/Connections/AMappableConnection.cs:61 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GetConnectionsAsync Core/Connections/AMappableConnection.cs:73 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: CloseAsync Core/Connections/Connection.cs:28 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: InternalDisposeAsync Core/Connections/MappedConnection.cs:34 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GetConnectionAsync Core/Connections/MappedConnection.cs:41 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: GetConnectionAsync Core/Connections/MappedConnection.cs:53 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: PingAsync Core/Connections/MultiServiceConnection.cs:22 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: CloseAsync Core/Connections/ServiceConnectionList.cs:41 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: DecodeAsync Core/Defaults/ABitEncoder.cs:12 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: DecodeAsync Core/Defaults/ABitEncoder.cs:15 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: EncodeAsync Core/Defaults/ABitEncoder.cs:31 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: StreamToByteArray Core/Defaults/BitConverterHelper.cs:5 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: DecodeAsync Core/Defaults/ByteArrayEncoder.cs:7 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: DecodeAsync Core/Defaults/CharEncoder.cs:7 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • Async method without CancellationToken: DecodeAsync Core/Defaults/JsonEncoder.cs:16 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
  • + 13 more in this group — see findings.md.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated · ×10
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter Testing/Core/CoreTesting.csproj:17 — MSTest.TestAdapter 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter Testing/CQRSTesting/CQRSTesting.csproj:17 — MSTest.TestAdapter 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter Testing/CodeGenTesting/CodeGenTesting.csproj:19 — MSTest.TestAdapter 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter Testing/ConnectorTesting/AmazonSQNS/AmazonSQNS.csproj:16 — MSTest.TestAdapter 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestAdapter Testing/ConnectorTesting/Pulsar/Pulsar.csproj:16 — MSTest.TestAdapter 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestFramework Testing/Core/CoreTesting.csproj:18 — MSTest.TestFramework 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestFramework Testing/CQRSTesting/CQRSTesting.csproj:18 — MSTest.TestFramework 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestFramework Testing/CodeGenTesting/CodeGenTesting.csproj:20 — MSTest.TestFramework 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestFramework Testing/ConnectorTesting/AmazonSQNS/AmazonSQNS.csproj:17 — MSTest.TestFramework 4.2.3 — Legacy
  • Deprecated: MSTest.TestFramework Testing/ConnectorTesting/Pulsar/Pulsar.csproj:17 — MSTest.TestFramework 4.2.3 — Legacy
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking · ×10
  • Sync-over-async blocking — 9 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking Core/Utility.cs:35 — `tsk.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs:46 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:38 — `connectionTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:41 — `channelTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking Connectors/HiveMQ/Connection.cs:37 — `connectTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:38 — `subTask.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:45 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:46 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
  • Sync-over-async blocking CQRS/CqrsConnection.cs:45 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) · ×8
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Core/Utility.cs:35 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs:46 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:38 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:41 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Connectors/HiveMQ/Connection.cs:37 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:38 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:45 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) BenchMark/InMemoryBenchmarks/SubscribingInMemory.cs:46 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×8
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) Core/Helpers/ConsumerConnectionHelper.cs:103 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) Connectors/NATS/Connection.cs:279 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. On a teardown path letting it propagate is not an option (throwing out of `Dispose()` masks the failure already in flight and abandons the rest of the cleanup), so make the swallow deliberate instead: record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems — or, if one specific failure truly cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch (a comment on a catch-all still swallows everything else).
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) Connectors/Kafka/Subscription.cs:48 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) Connectors/ActiveMQ/Connection.cs:209 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. On a teardown path letting it propagate is not an option (throwing out of `Dispose()` masks the failure already in flight and abandons the rest of the cleanup), so make the swallow deliberate instead: record it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems — or, if one specific failure truly cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch (a comment on a catch-all still swallows everything else).
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) Connectors/RabbitMQ/Connection.cs:201 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) Connectors/ApachePulsar/Subscription.cs:61 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) Connectors/AmazonSNQS/Subscription.cs:41 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) CQRS/Consumers/CancellationRequestConsumer.cs:25 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
D17 · Explicit Debt · Dead code · ×6
  • Dead code: BasicMessageToNameAndVersionMessage Testing/Core/Converters/BasicMessageToNameAndVersionMessage.cs:6 — NamedType BasicMessageToNameAndVersionMessage — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including CoreTesting(net8.0), and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
  • Dead code: NoChannelMessageToBasicMessage Testing/Core/Converters/NoChannelMessageToBasicMessage.cs:6 — NamedType NoChannelMessageToBasicMessage — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including CoreTesting(net8.0), and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
  • Dead code: ReturnsInOrder Testing/Core/MoqExtensions.cs:7 — Method ReturnsInOrder — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including CoreTesting(net8.0), and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
  • Dead code: NonContextConverter Testing/CodeGenTesting/Converters/NonContextConverter.cs:6 — NamedType NonContextConverter — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including CodeGenTesting(net8.0), and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
  • Dead code: NonContextMessageEncoder Testing/CodeGenTesting/Encoders/NonContextMessageEncoder.cs:6 — NamedType NonContextMessageEncoder — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including CodeGenTesting(net8.0), and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
  • Dead code: NonContextMessageEncryptor Testing/CodeGenTesting/Encryptors/NonContextMessageEncryptor.cs:7 — NamedType NonContextMessageEncryptor — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including CodeGenTesting(net8.0), and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:68 — Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:68-72 | Connectors/ZeroMQ/MessageMapper.cs:63-67 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:396 — Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:396-400 | Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:409-413 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:396` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Core/Connections/Connection.cs:132 — Core/Connections/Connection.cs:132-136 | Core/Connections/MappedConnection.cs:165-169 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Fake-async · ×3
  • Fake-async — async method never awaits Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:172 — `PublishMessageAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work.
  • Fake-async — async method never awaits Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:199 — `PingAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work.
  • Fake-async — async method never awaits Core/Connections/ServiceConnectionList.cs:35 — `GetAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work.
X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result` · ×3
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result` Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:447 — Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result` Core/Connections/AConnection.cs:611 — Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout.
  • Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result` Core/Utility.cs:25 — Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout.
D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×2
  • TooManyMethods: AConnection Core/Connections/AConnection.cs — TooManyMethods — 712 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 74 methods, declared across 3 files: Connections/AConnection.cs (46), Connections/AConnection.Consumers.cs (18), Connections/AConnection.Resilience.cs (10). The bar is 30 methods; this is 44 over it, 2.47× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
  • TooManyMethods: MessageContext Core/MessageContext.MessageTypes.cs — TooManyMethods — 317 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 34 methods, declared across 6 files: Core/MessageContext.MessageTypes.cs (13), Core/MessageContext.Converter.cs (7), Core/MessageContext.Encoding.cs (6), Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs (5), +2 more file(s). The bar is 30 methods; this is 4 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) Core/Connections/MappedConnection.cs:89 — Core/Connections/MappedConnection.cs:89-100 | Core/Connections/MultiServiceConnection.cs:46-57 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) Core/Connections/ResiliencePolicy.cs:92 — Core/Connections/ResiliencePolicy.cs:92-103 | Core/Connections/ResiliencePolicy.cs:126-137 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Core/Connections/ResiliencePolicy.cs:92` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:36 — Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:36-44 | Connectors/ZeroMQ/MessageMapper.cs:40-48 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:13 — Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:13-21 | Connectors/ZeroMQ/MessageMapper.cs:10-18 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
X1 · Async correctness · Blocking `ManualResetEventSlim.Wait` inside an `async` method · ×2
  • Blocking `ManualResetEventSlim.Wait` inside an `async` method Core/Subscriptions/QueryResponseSubscription.cs:96 — `ManualResetEventSlim.Wait` parks the thread until another thread signals it — inside a method that is already `async`, the wait should be awaitable (a `TaskCompletionSource`, `SemaphoreSlim.WaitAsync`, or `WaitHandle` bridged with `Task.Factory.FromAsync`).
  • Blocking `ManualResetEventSlim.Wait` inside an `async` method Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:209 — `ManualResetEventSlim.Wait` parks the thread until another thread signals it — inside a method that is already `async`, the wait should be awaitable (a `TaskCompletionSource`, `SemaphoreSlim.WaitAsync`, or `WaitHandle` bridged with `Task.Factory.FromAsync`).
X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader · Length read from the parsed input is spent without ever being bounded · ×2
  • Length read from the parsed input is spent without ever being bounded Connectors/ZeroMQ/MessageMapper.cs:23 — `len` is read from the stream being parsed at line 22 (`ReadInt32`), then read in bulk from that same stream at line 23 — and nowhere in this method is `len` bounded from above — compared to a limit, clamped, or checked against the input that remains (a zero or sign test, or the loop that counts up to it, bounds nothing). A file the caller did not write therefore chooses the size directly: a value near `int.MaxValue` allocates until the process dies, and a value that overflows the cast to `int` goes negative and throws out of a parser whose failure path was written for malformed input, not for hostile input. Bound `len` against the bytes actually remaining in the stream before spending it.
  • Length read from the parsed input is spent without ever being bounded Connectors/AmazonSNQS/MessageMapper.cs:26 — `len` is read from the stream being parsed at line 25 (`ReadInt32`), then read in bulk from that same stream at line 26 — and nowhere in this method is `len` bounded from above — compared to a limit, clamped, or checked against the input that remains (a zero or sign test, or the loop that counts up to it, bounds nothing). A file the caller did not write therefore chooses the size directly: a value near `int.MaxValue` allocates until the process dies, and a value that overflows the cast to `int` goes negative and throws out of a parser whose failure path was written for malformed input, not for hostile input. Bound `len` against the bytes actually remaining in the stream before spending it.
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it · ×2
  • Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it Core/Middleware/CompressionMiddleware.cs:18 — `zip` is a `BrotliStream`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 18). Every use of it in `AfterMessageEncodeAsync` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var zip = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw.
  • Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:57 — `connectionMonitor` is a `NetMQMonitor`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 57). Every use of it in `SendMessageToDestination` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var connectionMonitor = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw.
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Disposes a dependency it does not own · ×2
  • Disposes a dependency it does not own Connectors/ActiveMQ/ConsumerInstance.cs:31 — `messageConsumer` is never created by `ConsumerInstance` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 31). Its declared type `IMessageConsumer` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed.
  • Disposes a dependency it does not own CQRS/CqrsConnection.cs:174 — `contractConnection` is never created by `CqrsConnection` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 174). Its declared type `IContractConnection` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed.
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Owned disposable field is never released · ×2
  • Owned disposable field is never released Connectors/ZeroMQ/Connection.cs:50 — `Connection` implements `IDisposable` — so it has told every caller it holds something worth releasing — and it constructs `pingResponseEvent` itself (line 50), which makes that instance its own. But `pingResponseEvent` is named in none of the methods the disposal search covered: `DisposeAsync` (line 260) — that is `Dispose` plus every method `Dispose` calls BY NAME, so a release reached through an interface, a delegate or a base class is not followed and is worth checking before acting. On what was read, the type's disposal releases everything except the one thing it owns. A disposable the owner never disposes is held until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and forever if it does not — which for a synchronisation primitive, a timer, a stream or a handle means the resource accumulates once per instance for the life of the process. Release it in `Dispose` (`pingResponseEvent?.Dispose();`), or, if it truly does not need releasing, drop `IDisposable` from the type so the claim and the behaviour agree.
  • Owned disposable field is never released Connectors/AmazonSNQS/Connection.cs:25 — `Connection` implements `IDisposable` — so it has told every caller it holds something worth releasing — and it constructs `batchedMessageStream` itself (line 25), which makes that instance its own. But `batchedMessageStream` is named in none of the methods the disposal search covered: `DisposeAsync` (line 127) — that is `Dispose` plus every method `Dispose` calls BY NAME, so a release reached through an interface, a delegate or a base class is not followed and is worth checking before acting. On what was read, the type's disposal releases everything except the one thing it owns. A disposable the owner never disposes is held until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and forever if it does not — which for a synchronisation primitive, a timer, a stream or a handle means the resource accumulates once per instance for the life of the process. Release it in `Dispose` (`batchedMessageStream?.Dispose();`), or, if it truly does not need releasing, drop `IDisposable` from the type so the claim and the behaviour agree.
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) · ×2
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Connectors/Kafka/Middleware/SchemaValidationMiddleware.cs:155 — `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Connectors/GooglePubSub/Connection.cs:138 — `catch` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
C1 · Data Protection · No data-protection/encryption · ×1
  • No data-protection/encryption — 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.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cyclomatic 21) Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:56 — MessageContextGenerator.Generate has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cognitive 66) · ×1
  • MessageContextGenerator.Generate (cognitive 66) Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:56 — MessageContextGenerator.Generate has cognitive complexity 66 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×1
  • FileTooLong: Connections/AConnection.cs Core/Connections/AConnection.cs — FileTooLong — 510 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 10 over it, 1.02× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) Core/MessageContext.MessageTypes.cs:75 — Core/MessageContext.MessageTypes.cs:75-91 | Generators/MessageContextGenerator.cs:370-386 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:56 — Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:56-70 | Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:85-99 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:56` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) Generators/EncodersHelper.cs:12 — Generators/EncodersHelper.cs:12-25 | Generators/EncryptorsHelper.cs:12-25 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Generators/EncodersHelper.cs:12` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) Generators/ConvertersHelper.cs:12 — Generators/ConvertersHelper.cs:12-20 | Generators/EncodersHelper.cs:12-20 | Generators/EncryptorsHelper.cs:12-20 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Generators/ConvertersHelper.cs:12` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:11 — Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:11-17 | Core/MessageContext.QueryResponse.cs:21-27 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) CQRS/Registrars/ContractedConnectionRegistrar.cs:13 — CQRS/Registrars/ContractedConnectionRegistrar.cs:13-30 | CQRS/Registrars/MappedConnectionRegistrar.cs:13-30 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `CQRS/Registrars/ContractedConnectionRegistrar.cs:13` it runs out through the closing brace of the declaration holding it and carries on into the declaration that follows — the window is the tail of one member plus the head of the next, so no call can be substituted for those exact lines, and the smallest declaration that contains all of them is the type they sit in. The repeated unit is the member each site sits in: where those members' bodies are the same, move one whole member to the shared location and have the others delegate to it; where the copies are a run of near-identical overloads or wrappers that differ only in their signatures, the repetition IS the run — a one-line delegation has no helper inside it to lift — so generate the run from the set it enumerates, or accept it and keep each member's own documentation with it.
D8 · Code Coverage · Low coverage · ×1
  • Low coverage: Abstractions/MQContractMessageContext.cs Abstractions/MQContractMessageContext.cs:1 — 18.2% line coverage (2/11).
M1 · Documentation (README) · README may be stale · ×1
  • README may be stale — 320 code files changed in the last 6 months but the README was not touched — it may no longer reflect the system.
SC1 · Supply-chain hygiene · NuGet dependencies are not locked · ×1
  • NuGet dependencies are not locked — No packages.lock.json and no central package management — restores aren't reproducible or pinned (SSDF PW.4.4). Enable <RestorePackagesWithLockFile>true</RestorePackagesWithLockFile> (commit the lockfile) or adopt Directory.Packages.props. Advisory — never scored.
X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Finalizer on a type that owns no unmanaged resource · ×1
  • Finalizer on a type that owns no unmanaged resource Connectors/ActiveMQ/ConsumerInstance.cs:37 — `ConsumerInstance` declares a finalizer (line 37), but nothing in the type is unmanaged: no `IntPtr`/`UIntPtr` or pointer field, no `SafeHandle`, no `HandleRef`, no `extern`/`DllImport` member and no `Marshal`/`GCHandle`/`NativeMemory` use. A finalizer can only release what the garbage collector cannot, so on a purely-managed type it releases nothing and costs something: every instance is put on the finalizer queue, survives at least one extra collection, and is then finalized on a thread that is NOT the disposing one — where the managed objects it touches may already have been finalized themselves. Delete the finalizer (and the `GC.SuppressFinalize` that exists to defuse it); if a handle is added later, wrap it in a `SafeHandle`, which brings its own correct finalization.
Minor — 38 finding(s)
D10 · Test Quality · Mock-dominated test · ×10
  • Mock-dominated test: CheckRegistrationUsingGenericsAndSuppliedInstanceWithParameters Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/Consumers/PubSubAsyncConsumerTests.cs:102 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IServiceSubscription>()`) against 0 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: CheckRegistrationUsingGenericsAndSuppliedInstanceWithParameters Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/Consumers/PubSubConsumerTests.cs:101 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IServiceSubscription>()`) against 0 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: CheckRegistrationUsingGenericsAndSuppliedInstanceWithParameters Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/Consumers/QueryResponseAsyncConsumerTests.cs:107 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IServiceSubscription>()`) against 0 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: CheckRegistrationUsingGenericsAndSuppliedInstanceWithParameters Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/Consumers/QueryResponseConsumerTests.cs:107 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IServiceSubscription>()`) against 0 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: TestRegisterContextInvokesMiddleware Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/MappedService/MessageContextTests.cs:42 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IMessageServiceConnection>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 2 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: TestRegisterMiddlewareInvokesContext Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/MappedService/MessageContextTests.cs:81 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IMessageServiceConnection>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 2 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: TestRegisterContextInvokesMiddleware Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/MultiService/MessageContextTests.cs:42 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IMessageServiceConnection>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 2 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: TestRegisterMiddlewareInvokesContext Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/MultiService/MessageContextTests.cs:81 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IMessageServiceConnection>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 2 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: TestRegisterContextInvokesMiddleware Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/SingleService/MessageContextTests.cs:40 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IMessageServiceConnection>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 2 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
  • Mock-dominated test: TestRegisterMiddlewareInvokesContext Testing/Core/ConnectionTests/SingleService/MessageContextTests.cs:78 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `new Mock<IMessageServiceConnection>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 2 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
X7 · Silent fallback defaults · Silent fallback default in catch · ×6
  • Silent fallback default in catch Core/MessageContext.Converter.cs:55 — `ExtractConvertersThroughReflection` swallows every exception into `return [];` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
  • Silent fallback default in catch Core/MessageContext.Encoding.cs:32 — `ExtractEncoderThroughReflection` swallows every exception into `return [];` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
  • Silent fallback default in catch Core/MessageContext.Encoding.cs:140 — `ExtractDecodeThroughReflection` swallows every exception into `return [];` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
  • Silent fallback default in catch Core/MessageContext.Encryptors.cs:35 — `ExtractEncryptorThroughReflection` swallows every exception into `return [];` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
  • Silent fallback default in catch Connectors/Kafka/Middleware/SchemaValidationMiddleware.cs:155 — `GetSchemaIdFromCacheAsync` swallows every exception and sets `schemaId = null;` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
  • Silent fallback default in catch Connectors/GooglePubSub/Connection.cs:138 — `SubscribeAsync` swallows every exception and sets `createSubscription = true;` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let validation throw.
M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×4
  • README/code drift README.md:21 — README.md installs the package `MQContract.Abstractions` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Abstractions`), but no project or props file references it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift README.md:22 — README.md installs the package `MQContract.Core` (`dotnet add package MQContract.Core`), but no project or props file references it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift README.md:23 — README.md installs the package `MQContract.InMemory` (`dotnet add package MQContract.InMemory`), but no project or props file references it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift README.md:96 — README.md links to `/Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md`, but `Connectors/KubeMQ/Readme.md` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
D27 · Navigability · Pass-through layer · ×2
  • Pass-through layer CQRS/Registrars/ContractedConnectionRegistrar.cs:8 — ContractedConnectionRegistrar: all 3 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to contractedConnection and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call contractedConnection directly, or give the layer a job.
  • Pass-through layer CQRS/Registrars/MappedConnectionRegistrar.cs:8 — MappedConnectionRegistrar: all 3 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to mappedConnection and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call mappedConnection directly, or give the layer a job.
X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×2
  • Duplicated predicate Core/Connections/AConnection.Consumers.cs:83 — `headerFilter!=null || messageFilter!=null` appears character-identically in 2 files — CQRS/CqrsConnection.cs, Core/Connections/AConnection.Consumers.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate Generators/ConvertersHelper.cs:13 — `node is ClassDeclarationSyntax cds && cds.BaseList is not null` appears character-identically in 3 files — Generators/ConvertersHelper.cs, Generators/EncodersHelper.cs, Generators/EncryptorsHelper.cs. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
D21 · Naming Consistency · The spelling 'Recieved' is used in two different classes for the same concept (handling an error). This is a consistent misspelling of 'Received', but it represents a deviation from standard English spelling conventions. While consistent within itself, it is a naming error that should be corrected to 'Received' for correctness. · ×1
  • The spelling 'Recieved' is used in two different classes for the same concept (handling an error). This is a consistent misspelling of 'Received', but it represents a deviation from standard English spelling conventions. While consistent within itself, it is a naming error that should be corrected to 'Received' for correctness. — Rename to 'OnErrorReceived' or 'ErrorReceived' to fix the spelling error. (symbols: MQContract.CQRS.Consumers.CommandResponseConsumer<TCommand, TCommandResult>.MQContract.Interfaces.Consumers.IBaseConsumer.ErrorRecieved(System.Exception), CQRSSample.GetUserProcessor.ErrorRecieved(System.Exception))
D21 · Naming Consistency · The word 'Resilience' is spelled inconsistently · ×1
  • The word 'Resilience' is spelled inconsistently: 'Resilliance' (with double 'l') in the method name `GetResilliancePolicy` versus the correct spelling 'Resilience' in the field name `queryPolicies` (of type `ResiliencePolicy`) and the type name `ResiliencePolicy`. This is a typo in the method name. — Rename `GetResilliancePolicy` to `GetResiliencePolicy`. (symbols: MQContract.Connections.AConnection<TContractConnection>.GetResilliancePolicy<TMessage>(string?, string), MQContract.Connections.ResiliencePolicy.queryPolicies)
D24 · Comment Value · redundant comment · ×1
  • redundant comment Testing/ConnectorTesting/Kafka/KafkaConnectorTests.cs:41 — "Confluent's CreateTopicsAsync accepts TopicSpecification collection" — delete - restates the method signature; remove or link to the API docs instead
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1
  • No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
M2 · Architecture documentation · No architecture diagram/doc · ×1
  • No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
M3 · Folder & project structure · No src/ separation · ×1
  • No src/ separation — Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
M3 · Folder & project structure · No tests/ separation · ×1
  • No tests/ separation — Tests aren't grouped in a dedicated test folder — the test surface isn't separable from production code at a glance.
M3 · Folder & project structure · Inconsistent root namespaces · ×1
  • Inconsistent root namespaces — Only 16/46 projects share a common root namespace — the code's module identity is inconsistent.
P12 · CI test-gate honesty · Sleep-based test synchronization · ×1
  • Sleep-based test synchronization — 6 Task.Delay/Thread.Sleep call(s) in test code synchronize with background work by sleeping — a known flakiness precursor on slow runners. Prefer polling with a deadline or completion signals.
P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1
  • No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 6723 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
P6 · Release Hygiene · No changelog · ×1
  • No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
X2 · Cancellation propagation · Not all async methods take a CancellationToken · ×1
  • Not all async methods take a CancellationToken — Only 118/229 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
X5 · Nullable reference types · Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score · ×1
  • Null-forgiving operator (`!`) suppressions reduce the NRT score — ~2.6 `!` suppressions per 1k syntax nodes — 200 suppression(s) across the 78405 syntax node(s) in code where nullable warnings are ENABLED, which is the only code a `!` can suppress anything in (a `!` under `#nullable disable` is inert and is not counted, and its file's nodes are not in the denominator). Each one tells the compiler to trust you about null, suppressing the very safety NRTs provide.
Minor — 35 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×32
  • Outdated: Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp — Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp 5.3.0 → 5.9.0 available (referenced by Core).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions 8.0.2 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Core).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging — Microsoft.Extensions.Logging 8.0.1 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Core).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions 8.0.3 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Core).
  • Outdated: Polly — Polly 8.6.6 → 8.8.0 available (referenced by Core).
  • Outdated: NATS.Net — NATS.Net 2.8.1 → 3.3.1 available (referenced by NATS).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Diagnostics.HealthChecks.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.Diagnostics.HealthChecks.Abstractions 8.0.25 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Abstractions).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug — Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Debug 8.0.1 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by NATSSample).
  • Outdated: OpenTelemetry — OpenTelemetry 1.15.3 → 1.20.1 available (referenced by NATSSample).
  • Outdated: OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Console — OpenTelemetry.Exporter.Console 1.15.3 → 1.20.1 available (referenced by NATSSample).
  • Outdated: OpenTelemetry.Exporter.OpenTelemetryProtocol — OpenTelemetry.Exporter.OpenTelemetryProtocol 1.15.3 → 1.20.1 available (referenced by NATSSample).
  • Outdated: NJsonSchema — NJsonSchema 10.9.0 → 11.6.1 available (referenced by Kafka).
  • Outdated: StackExchange.Redis — StackExchange.Redis 2.13.17 → 3.4.5 available (referenced by Redis).
  • Outdated: DotPulsar — DotPulsar 5.3.1 → 5.3.4 available (referenced by ApachePulsar).
  • Outdated: System.Text.Json — System.Text.Json 10.0.9 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by BenchMark).
  • Outdated: coverlet.collector — coverlet.collector 10.0.1 → 10.1.0 available (referenced by CoreTesting).
  • Outdated: coverlet.msbuild — coverlet.msbuild 10.0.1 → 10.1.0 available (referenced by CoreTesting).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Diagnostics.Testing — Microsoft.Extensions.Diagnostics.Testing 10.4.0 → 10.11.0 available (referenced by CoreTesting).
  • Outdated: Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk — Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk 18.6.0 → 18.11.0 available (referenced by CoreTesting).
  • Outdated: Moq — Moq 4.20.72 → 4.21.0 available (referenced by CoreTesting).
  • Outdated: MSTest.TestAdapter — MSTest.TestAdapter 4.2.3 → 4.5.1 available (referenced by CoreTesting).
  • Outdated: MSTest.TestFramework — MSTest.TestFramework 4.2.3 → 4.5.1 available (referenced by CoreTesting).
  • Outdated: Testcontainers.ActiveMq — Testcontainers.ActiveMq 4.12.0 → 4.16.0 available (referenced by ActiveMQ).
  • Outdated: Testcontainers.LocalStack — Testcontainers.LocalStack 4.12.0 → 4.16.0 available (referenced by AmazonSQNS).
  • Outdated: Testcontainers.ServiceBus — Testcontainers.ServiceBus 4.12.0 → 4.16.0 available (referenced by AzureServiceBus).
  • + 7 more in this group — see findings.md.
D10 · Test Quality · Mock framework · ×3
  • Mock framework: Moq — CoreTesting(net8.0) references Moq.
  • Mock framework: Moq — CQRSTesting(net8.0) references Moq.
  • Mock framework: Moq — CodeGenTesting(net8.0) references Moq.

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)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-0ece183cc8984660a0e9d44091399533/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-0ece183cc8984660a0e9d44091399533/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrep—semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .9artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiesdotnet—dotnet list MQContract.sln package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json1artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.0—
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/gdpr.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .4artifacts/raw/semgrep-gdpr.json
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosure—disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0—
D40 · Network Egress Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D43 · Malicious Dependenciesnone (no readable dependency manifest)—none (no readable dependency manifest): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).0—

Run 01a161d5-2e7c-7bff-a819-048d6e533b7e · 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 — 8 field(s) across 2 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, from the C# syntax tree, with a deliberately specific identifier classifier — the same one the C1–C5 compliance cards use to decide whether personal data is present, so CardDefinition or FileName don't trip. Two caveats stated rather than glossed: those cards additionally require corroboration (a persistence/account signal, or two distinct PII categories) that this inventory deliberately does not, so it lists more than they gate on; and D32 Data Compliance shares nothing with it — that dimension is a separate semgrep ruleset for personal data leaking into logs, URLs and browser storage, and a clean D32 result says nothing about this list. Informational — it feeds no score.

Name — 6 field(s)
  • ArrivalAnnouncement.FirstName Samples/Messages/ArrivalAnnouncement.cs:6
  • ArrivalAnnouncement.LastName Samples/Messages/ArrivalAnnouncement.cs:6
  • Greeting.FirstName Samples/Messages/Greeting.cs:6
  • Greeting.LastName Samples/Messages/Greeting.cs:6
  • StoredArrivalAnnouncement.FirstName Samples/Messages/StoredArrivalAnnouncement.cs:6
  • StoredArrivalAnnouncement.LastName Samples/Messages/StoredArrivalAnnouncement.cs:6
Email — 2 field(s)
  • CreateUserCommand.Email Samples/CQRSSample/Messages/CreateUserCommand.cs:7
  • User.Email Samples/CQRSSample/Messages/User.cs:3

Issues: 18 · Warnings: 127 · Recommendations: 38 · Info: 35 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 22-10-2026 @ 04:18 UTC.

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