Public report of softwaremill/elasticmq, published 26 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, 26 October 2026, 04:45 UTC · Survey ID cd_bcd1407d8c9348f0922501d40114b78c

softwaremill/elasticmq

Measured 26 October 2026, 04:44 UTC, at code version 2ace8f5

No regression since the last survey Code coverage: not measured

A regression is a drop of 0.5 points or more in the score, or of 2.5 or more out of 10 in a dimension, since the last survey.

Code coverage is not measured: JavaScript/TypeScript suite (CouldNotMeasureTestRunFailed).

CAI score 41out of 100 At risk Down 1 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 90 Adequate Performance 70 Strong Maturity 67 Adequate Code Health 55 Adequate Accessibility 41 Weak Production Readiness 37 Weak Security and Compliance 35 Weak

A small codebase: 9,653 lines of product code in 11 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: under 0.1 person-years · Weakest lens: Security and Compliance, 35

Findings by how serious they are

70 critical 134 serious 55 minor

12 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
26 October 2026, 04:44 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.

A critical security finding is open, such as a library with a known critical vulnerability or a password or key found in the code. The score itself is unchanged, but its band shows At risk until the finding is fixed. See the Security and Compliance lens.

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 ▸

83of 83 dimensions measured by tools.
234of 259 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 25 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
83dimensions across 7 lenses, read from 9,653 lines of product code in 11 projects.
Chapters

Executive summary

softwaremill/elasticmq is rated At risk because critical security findings are open, most of them in the build pipeline. Its score is held back in part because 11 of the dependencies have a known vulnerability. It scores 41 out of 100, which the At risk rating leaves unchanged.

Security and Compliance, at 35, is the weakest lens and counts most in the score. The best first step is replacing the weak hashes, worth about 5 points. Raising Security and Compliance to 70 would lift the score to about 46.

Thirty-four pipeline tools are referenced by a changeable name, so the build pipeline can be tampered with. Twelve known security holes in the packages the code depends on can be used by attackers, and six settings leave the servers or containers unsafe. Pinning each tool to an exact version, updating the vulnerable packages and correcting the unsafe settings would close these risks. Limiting each secret to its own step would fix the two secrets exposed to more of the pipeline than needed, and the pipeline step that installs packages without pinning their versions needs the packages it installs pinned to exact versions. The six form fields without a label need a label.

The product code is 9,653 lines, about €13,000 to rebuild.

Code Health 55 Adequate, capped by Nullable reference types Architecture 90 Adequate, capped by Project Cohesion Maturity 67 Adequate, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 37 Weak, capped by Security & performance tooling and DR & Backup Security and Compliance 35 Weak, capped by Static Analysis (SAST), Dependency Vulnerabilities, Supply-chain Provenance & Signing and Web-Security Posture Accessibility 41 Weak, capped by Keyboard semantics Performance 70 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.
Security and Compliance 35 · counts for 46%Production Readiness 37 · counts for 25%Accessibility 41 · counts for 14%Code Health 55 · counts for 8%Maturity 67 · counts for 4%Performance 70 · counts for 2%Architecture 90 · counts for 1%

If Security and Compliance rose from 35 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 41 to about 46.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Product code 62%Tests 38%
New since the last survey: 38 findings

These 38 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 12 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: 8 findings

These 8 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 12 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Rebuild cost: about €13,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€4,400 to €22,000, for 74 to 234 hours of work, under 0.1 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 41. 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: 9,653 lines of product code
What it is notNot a quotation: nobody has offered to build it for that. Not a valuation: it says nothing about what the business is worth. Not a certified figure: no professional has signed it as one.

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. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.

Top priorities

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

1
Review each MD5/SHA1 use by what it protects: replace it with SHA-256+ (or a KDF for passwords) where the digest is security-relevant, and switch it to a non-cryptographic hash (xxhash, murmurhash) where it only derives an identifier such as a cache key.
This repository constructs a collision-broken hash (MD5/SHA1) at 2 sites, not one: `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:392` (MessageDigest.getInstance("MD5")), `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:440` (MessageDigest.getInstance("MD5")). Each is a separate decision — fixing only the line this row cites leaves the others in place.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Medium effort · Web-Security Posture
2
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2).
Raises the score by about 1 point · Low effort · Static Analysis (SAST)
3
Resolve the 1 Critical vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED.
Raises the score by about 1 point · Low effort · Dependency Vulnerabilities

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 €13,000 to build again, under 0.1 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Security and Compliance, at 35 (Weak). Security and Compliance is about how well the product is protected, and how it handles personal data. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Security and Compliance also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Security and Compliance grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Security and Compliance actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Review each MD5/SHA1 use by what it protects: replace it with SHA-256+ (or a KDF for passwords) where the digest is security-relevant, and switch it to a non-cryptographic hash (xxhash, murmurhash) where it only derives an identifier such as a cache key. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 5 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 — module dependency graph

Project dependencies, layered top-to-bottom; arrows show direction. Any dashed red edge points upward or sideways, which only happens where the projects form a dependency cycle. A graph without cycles has none.

arch commonTest commonTest core core nativeServer nativeServer server server nativeServer->server persistence persistence persistenceCore persistenceCore persistenceCore->core persistenceFile persistenceFile persistenceFile->persistenceCore persistenceSql persistenceSql persistenceSql->persistenceCore rest rest restSqs restSqs restSqs->core restSqs->persistenceFile restSqs->persistenceSql server->core server->restSqs ui ui

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.

58 modules, with 84 dependencies between them. 2 loops run through 8 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 18 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 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache2 org.elasticmq.actor.reply3 org.elasticmq.persistence.TopologicalSorter4 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule.AttributeValuesCalculator5 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model6 org.elasticmq.util7 ui.app.queues.[name].page8 ui.lib.types9 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorStorage10 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache.ReceiveFailure11 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations.ReceiveMessageOps12 org.elasticmq.actor.reply.ReplySupport13 org.elasticmq.msg14 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule15 ui.app.queues.[name]16 ui.components.queue-card17 ui.lib18 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorWaitForMessagesOps19 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations20 ui.components21 org.elasticmq.actor.queue22 org.elasticmq23 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.MessageQueue24 org.elasticmq.actor.QueueManagerActorStorage25 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueEvent26 org.elasticmq.metrics27 org.elasticmq.persistence28 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageDirectives29 org.elasticmq.actor30 org.elasticmq.persistence.file31 org.elasticmq.persistence.sql32 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageBatchDirectives33 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs34 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol35 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol.AWSJsonProtocol136 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SQSException37 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.directives38 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model.RequestPayload39 org.elasticmq.server40 org.elasticmq.server.config
1 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache
2 org.elasticmq.actor.reply
3 org.elasticmq.persistence.TopologicalSorter
4 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule.AttributeValuesCalculator
5 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model
6 org.elasticmq.util
7 ui.app.queues.[name].page
8 ui.lib.types
9 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorStorage112
10 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache.ReceiveFailure2
11 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations.ReceiveMessageOps2
12 org.elasticmq.actor.reply.ReplySupport1
13 org.elasticmq.msg2210
14 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule2
15 ui.app.queues.[name]1
16 ui.components.queue-card1
17 ui.lib6
18 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorWaitForMessagesOps1
19 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations861417
20 ui.components1
21 org.elasticmq.actor.queue178569
22 org.elasticmq11
23 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.MessageQueue4
24 org.elasticmq.actor.QueueManagerActorStorage1
25 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueEvent192
26 org.elasticmq.metrics12
27 org.elasticmq.persistence211
28 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageDirectives2
29 org.elasticmq.actor43132
30 org.elasticmq.persistence.file251
31 org.elasticmq.persistence.sql13315
32 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageBatchDirectives111
33 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs20112121
34 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol1
35 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol.AWSJsonProtocol11
36 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SQSException1
37 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.directives2219
38 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model.RequestPayload21
39 org.elasticmq.server211
40 org.elasticmq.server.config1111
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache2 org.elasticmq.actor.reply3 org.elasticmq.persistence.TopologicalSorter4 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule.AttributeValuesCalculator5 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model6 org.elasticmq.util7 ui.app.queues.[name].page8 ui.lib.types9 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorStorage10 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache.ReceiveFailure11 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations.ReceiveMessageOps12 org.elasticmq.actor.reply.ReplySupport13 org.elasticmq.msg14 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule15 ui.app.queues.[name]16 ui.components.queue-card17 ui.lib18 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorWaitForMessagesOps19 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations20 ui.components21 org.elasticmq.actor.queue22 org.elasticmq23 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.MessageQueue24 org.elasticmq.actor.QueueManagerActorStorage25 org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueEvent26 org.elasticmq.metrics27 org.elasticmq.persistence28 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageDirectives29 org.elasticmq.actor30 org.elasticmq.persistence.file31 org.elasticmq.persistence.sql32 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageBatchDirectives33 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs34 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol35 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol.AWSJsonProtocol136 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SQSException37 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.directives38 org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model.RequestPayload39 org.elasticmq.server40 org.elasticmq.server.configorg.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache1org.elasticmq.actor.reply2org.elasticmq.persistence.TopologicalSorter3org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule.AttributeValuesCalculator4org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model5org.elasticmq.util6ui.app.queues.[name].page7ui.lib.types8org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorStorage9org.elasticmq.actor.queue.ReceiveRequestAttemptCache.ReceiveFailure10org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations.ReceiveMessageOps11org.elasticmq.actor.reply.ReplySupport12org.elasticmq.msg13org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AttributesModule14ui.app.queues.[name]15ui.components.queue-card16ui.lib17org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueActorWaitForMessagesOps18org.elasticmq.actor.queue.operations19ui.components20org.elasticmq.actor.queue21org.elasticmq22org.elasticmq.actor.queue.MessageQueue23org.elasticmq.actor.QueueManagerActorStorage24org.elasticmq.actor.queue.QueueEvent25org.elasticmq.metrics26org.elasticmq.persistence27org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageDirectives28org.elasticmq.actor29org.elasticmq.persistence.file30org.elasticmq.persistence.sql31org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SendMessageBatchDirectives32org.elasticmq.rest.sqs33org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol34org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.AWSProtocol.AWSJsonProtocol135org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.SQSException36org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.directives37org.elasticmq.rest.sqs.model.RequestPayload38org.elasticmq.server39org.elasticmq.server.config40112221221021161861417117856911411921221124313225113315111201121211112219212111111+18 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 55% · Adequate · gated by X5 ·

The Good
D1 · Scala Cyclomatic Complexity 8.2 D2 · Scala Cognitive Complexity 8.0 D4 · Scala Code Duplication 10.0 D17 · Scala Explicit Debt 9.9 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 10.0 R1 · React / TS Type Safety 9.2 R7 · React / TS Dead Code 10.0 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 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
The Bad
D3 · Scala God Classes 7.0 R10 · React / TS Code Duplication 6.9 R2 · React / TS Cyclomatic Complexity 6.9 X3 · Repo Exception handling 6.6
The Ugly
R3 · React / TS Large Files 4.3 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 2.0

At a glance — Architecture · 90% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

The Good
D5 · Scala Coupling 9.3 D6 · Scala Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D35 · Scala Change Coupling 9.9 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.1 AX2 · Repo Stateful singletons 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0 R9 · React / TS Circular Imports 10.0
The Ugly
D26 · Scala Project Cohesion 0.0

At a glance — Maturity · 67% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good
D15 · Scala Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D16 · Scala Bus Factor 9.4 D19 · Scala Documentation Quality 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 9.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0
The Ugly
D20 · Scala ADR Quality 0.0 D34 · Scala Knowledge Freshness 4.7 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 2.0

At a glance — Readiness · 37% · Weak · gated by P3, P5 ·

The Good
D9 · Scala Test Distribution 10.0 D10 · Scala Test Quality 10.0 D12 · Scala Dependency Hygiene 9.8 D13 · Scala Secret Scanning 10.0 D14 · Scala License Compliance 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0 R5 · React / TS Dependency Freshness 8.1 R6 · React / TS Tooling 10.0 R8 · React / TS Dependency Hygiene 10.0
The Bad
P2 · Repo Observability 5.5 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0
The Ugly
P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 0.0 P5 · Repo DR & Backup 0.0 R4 · React / TS Test Coverage 4.4

At a glance — Security · 35% · Weak · gated by D29, D30, D36, S1 ·

The Good
D28 · Scala Secrets (history) 10.0 D43 · Scala Malicious Dependencies 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 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
D31 · Scala IaC & Container Security 6.8
The Ugly
D29 · Scala Static Analysis (SAST) 3.2 D30 · Scala Dependency Vulnerabilities 1.1 D36 · Scala Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 2.5 S1 · Repo Web-Security Posture 2.0

At a glance — Accessibility · 41% · Weak · gated by AC4 ·

The Good
AC5 · Repo ARIA correctness 10.0
The Bad
AC2 · Repo Forms & labels 5.2 AC3 · Repo Page structure 5.0 AC6 · Repo Visual & motion safety 6.3
The Ugly
AC4 · Repo Keyboard semantics 1.0 AC7 · Repo A11y enforcement 4.0

At a glance — Performance · 70% · Strong ·

The Good
PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 7.0

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 — Injection49High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures22High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration14High / Critical

Roadmap

First, replace weak MD5 and SHA1 hashes with secure alternatives like SHA-256 or non-cryptographic options depending on their specific use case. Next, resolve the 11 high-severity dependency vulnerabilities and integrate automated security scanning into the CI pipeline to prevent future regressions. Additionally, formalize disaster recovery procedures by documenting backup and geo-recovery strategies in infrastructure as code. Finally, improve accessibility by ensuring custom controls are fully keyboard-operable and correcting anchor link semantics.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Review each MD5/SHA1 use by what it protects: replace it with SHA-256+ (or a KDF for passwords) where the digest is security-relevant, and switch it to a non-cryptographic hash (xxhash, murmurhash) where it only derives an identifier such as a cache key. This repository constructs a collision-broken hash (MD5/SHA1) at 2 sites, not one: `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:392` (MessageDigest.getInstance("MD5")), `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:440` (MessageDigest.getInstance("MD5")). Each is a separate decision — fixing only the line this row cites leaves the others in place.+4.8 ptsMediumWeb-Security Posture
Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2).+1.2 ptsLowStatic Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 1 Critical vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED.+1.2 ptsLowDependency Vulnerabilities
Resolve the 2 Critical IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2).+1.2 ptsLowIaC & Container Security
Resolve the 4 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2).+1.2 ptsLowIaC & Container Security
Resolve the 11 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (11).+2.2 ptsMediumDependency Vulnerabilities
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: scalafix or scapegoat — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.+2.2 ptsMediumSecurity & performance tooling
Codify backups + geo-recovery in IaC and document RTO/RPO and the restore procedure — a persistence guard alone is not disaster recovery.+2.2 ptsMediumDR & Backup

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 24 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 17% slop · 54% mixed · 29% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED0.0SlopDependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED0.2SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED1.3SlopIaC & Container Security: Critical IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED3.4SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED5.8MixedIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED5.9MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/QueueManagerActor.scala6.7MixedExplicit Debt: TodoComment
ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx7.1MixedCyclomatic Complexity: receive-messages-panel.ReceiveMessagesPanel (cyclomatic 19)
ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx7.2MixedCyclomatic Complexity: generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cyclomatic 44)
ui/components/queue-details.tsx7.2MixedCyclomatic Complexity: queue-details.QueueDetails (cyclomatic 26)
REDACTED7.2MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED7.2MixedDependency Vulnerabilities: Critical vulnerability: REDACTED
REDACTED7.2MixedIaC & Container Security: Medium IaC: REDACTED
ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: send-message-modal.SendMessageModal (cyclomatic 29)
ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal (cyclomatic 25)
ui/components/queue-list.tsx7.4MixedCyclomatic Complexity: queue-list.QueueList (cyclomatic 21)
ui/components/queue-card.tsx7.4MixedCognitive Complexity: queue-card.QueueCard (cognitive 16)
rest/rest-sqs-testing-amazon-java-sdk/src/test/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/integration/multisdk/MessageOperationsTests.scala8.2Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
rest/rest-sqs-testing-amazon-java-sdk/src/test/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/integration/common/SQSRestServerWithSdkV1Client.scala8.2Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/ReceiveRequestAttemptCache.scala8.2Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment

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 — 70

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 — 134

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 — 55

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

Could not be resolved — 12

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. 83 of 83 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); none rely on LLM judgement. 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 — 83 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D10D12D13D14D15D16D17D19D20D26D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D43AC2AC3AC4AC5AC6AC7AX10AX2AX3AX4AX6AX8GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P5P6PF3R1R10R2R3R4R5R6R7R8R9S1X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X5

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, 234 of 259 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 · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurement—◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a17686-2930-7715-8142-97a12750703d.

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.

  • D10 Test Quality — 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. The 36 test(s) behind this row are the ones the JavaScript/TypeScript census could read, and this repository also carries at least 54 test source file(s) (.scala) that it cannot: it reads JavaScript/TypeScript test declarations off disk, so a JUnit/pytest-style suite is invisible to it. Skipped tests, zero-assertion tests and the other quality signals on this row are UNMEASURED in that suite — their absence from the counts above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that those tests are sound.
  • 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 SCORED: this repository's production source includes .scala, and the scala executor ran against the .scala half and could not be re-run to completion inside our analyzer environment — so reliability was not measured for the repository as a whole. The JavaScript/TypeScript (jest via `npm ci --ignore-scripts` in integration-tests/nodejs/ (0 tests); vitest via `npm ci --ignore-scripts` in ui/ (31 tests)): measured (0 flaky) suite(s) did re-run, and came back with 0 flaky across 1 measured tier(s) — but that is a figure for one half of the product, and we do not publish a partial one as if it were complete. This is OUR limitation, not a defect in the repo — test reliability is excluded from the score rather than counted. The remedy is our analyzer environment, not a runner nobody has built.
  • D14 License Compliance — 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. This repository declares REDACTED, but the licence verdict published here was taken over its sbt dependencies. Nothing was read about its npm dependencies' licensing in either direction, and a clean score on this card must not be read as covering them.
  • D19 Documentation Quality — 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. Each ecosystem's manifests (what makes a folder runnable or a published package) need their own proof before D19 judges its units. Until then those folders' READMEs are judged only as documents (boilerplate, structure), never counted as complete.
  • D21 Naming Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D21's deterministic naming rules are gated on C# first (docs/plans/deterministic-engine.md, P5): each other language is switched on only after its own concept suite and A/B gate pass. Until then its declarations carry no naming verdict this run — this says nothing about whether its names are consistent.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is an ADMISSION gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (integration-tests/nodejs/package.json), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here. D22 DOES collect the public API of every language in this tree, and admits a project only when its manifest makes that ecosystem's publication act in a form the marker recognises — so what is missing is not a collector but an admission rule for the publication act this repository makes, if it makes one. The remedy is a better discriminator for that marker — not a collector, and no change to the scan image can close it. The marker's rules are measured to refuse applications, so one refused repository is the rule working as calibrated; several are the evidence that it is too strict. For npm the surface is what a published REDACTED's entry points (exports, main, module, types) export, followed through the source; an entry that names build output the tree does not commit (dist/, build/) is not followed back to source, because only a tsconfig outDir/rootDir pair states that mapping and a bundler's input lives in executable configuration this engine does not evaluate.
  • D24 Comment Value — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check's reader does not cover the language this repository's product is written in, so it had nothing of the product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding about this repository.
  • D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 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. `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/BatchRequestsModule.scala` 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.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This dimension reads a project's own statement about the platform it runs on: a TargetFramework in a .NET project file, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain file or Cargo.toml rust-version, a .go-version, .java-version, .ruby-version, .tool-versions or .sdkmanrc, a go.mod go directive, a Maven or Gradle Java level or toolchain, a Gemfile's ruby directive, a mix.exs elixir requirement, a rebar.config minimum_otp_vsn, a pubspec.yaml SDK constraint, a build.sbt scalaVersion, or a framework major pinned by a dependency constraint. This repository carries none of them, so nothing about its platform was established. That is a gap in this analyzer's coverage, NOT a finding that the platform is supported — a language whose runtime is declared elsewhere (Package.swift, a REDACTED) is simply not read here yet.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via DockerCompose (REDACTED). compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — elasticmq-ui Pulling elasticmq Pulling elasticmq-ui Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden elasticmq Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: elasticmq Pulling elasticmq-ui Pulling elasticmq Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden elasticmq-ui Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped.
  • C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
  • C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
  • C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'scalikejdbc' is imported (persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/DB.scala:2), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
  • C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'scalikejdbc' is imported (persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/DB.scala:2), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'scalikejdbc' is imported (persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/DB.scala:2), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy — 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. M4 checks only the claim kinds adjudicated at or above 95 % precision: links and versions (PREREGISTRATION version 9). Paths, command arguments, installs, environment variables, settings, projects, packages, routes, cd targets, infrastructure products and removed modules are read but not checked, and none of them is reported or counted.

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.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality publishes two things only: a runnable or packaged unit with no example, and a multi-project root README that maps none of its parts. It does not judge clarity, and its other checks (overview, licence, boilerplate, structure, empty sections, XML-doc coverage) are withheld after adjudication: their candidates are counted in the card's gaps, not shown as rows. A false statement in a document is M4's; units are .NET projects only.
  • D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
  • D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
  • AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics: Keyboard semantics are inferred from markup attributes — interactivity wired purely in script, focus managed at runtime, and component-level handlers are invisible. A clean result means "no static keyboard-trap shape", not a keyboard-operability proof.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness: ARIA correctness is checked against the static role/attribute shape — roles/attributes set dynamically aren't seen, a valid role says nothing about whether it matches the element's real behaviour, and required-state checks are suppressed when a JSX spread could supply them. The two-branch toggle check (a control whose state is conveyed only by which of two mutually exclusive branches renders) reads CONDITIONALS THAT ARE ATTRIBUTES — Vue v-if/v-else/v-show and Alpine x-if/x-show — so the same toggle written as a Svelte {#if} block or a JSX ternary is control flow the markup model never projects as a branch and is not seen at all.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
  • P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.
  • 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.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity8.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

9 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal at 44.

generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cyclomatic 44)ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:29
send-message-modal.SendMessageModal (cyclomatic 29)ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32
queue-details.QueueDetails (cyclomatic 26)ui/components/queue-details.tsx:22
create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal (cyclomatic 25)ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12
SendMessageDirectives.createMessage (cyclomatic 22)rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SendMessageDirectives.scala:76

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

What to do

  1. Bring the 1 body over 30 down to 30 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cyclomatic 44). — Refactoring it lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 8.2 to about 8.6/10.
  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 Complexity8.0 / 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 8.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

12 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal at 34.

generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cognitive 34)ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:29
send-message-modal.SendMessageModal (cognitive 29)ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32
queue-details.QueueDetails (cognitive 25)ui/components/queue-details.tsx:22
create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal (cognitive 24)ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12
queue-list.QueueList (cognitive 20)ui/components/queue-list.tsx:14

+ 7 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Bring the 1 body over 30 down to 30 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cognitive 34). — Refactoring it lifts Cognitive Complexity from 8.0 to about 8.2/10.
  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 Classes7.0 / 10Adequate✓ 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 7.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

8 over-large unit(s) detected — types, modules or files that carry too much.

FunctionTooLong: send-message-modal.SendMessageModal · ×8ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32

What to do

  1. Resolve the 8 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with receive-messages-panel.tsx (2), send-message-modal.tsx, generate-messages-modal.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
  2. 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 Duplication10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 duplicated block group(s) detected. Measured on part of this repository only: .tsx (28% of production source) was not exposed to THIS dimension's token comparison and is not in this count; duplication there is measured by R10 Code Duplication, the frontend lens's card running the same clone algorithm over the JS/TS token stream.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md.

D5 · Coupling9.3 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

11 production modules (npm+sbt), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; a dependsOn spread (deps: _*) and a project whose directory a helper computes are not visible there; 1 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 8 of the 11 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, declare types in source no model reads, or have no source directory of their own).

Off the main sequence: core

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)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 12 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.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

268 test methods: 174 unit, 94 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The JavaScript/TypeScript suite contributes 36 `it`/`test` case(s) across 5 test file(s) declaring at least one; its tier split is read from package names and paths only. The Python suite contributes 4 test function(s) across 1 file(s) declaring at least one — every `def test…` in a file pytest or unittest would collect, which is those frameworks' own definition of a case; a parametrize table counts once, so this is a floor. Its tier split is read from file names and paths only. The Scala suite contributes 228 test case(s) across 37 file(s) in a test source set declaring at least one — every `test("…")`, `it("…")`, `property("…")` and `"…" in {…}` registration and every JUnit `@Test`, which is how munit, ScalaTest, utest, ZIO Test and specs2 declare a case; a case registered under a computed name is not counted, so this is a floor. Its tier split is INFERRED from paths and file names, except sbt's src/it source set, which the build declares.

✓ 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, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 36 tests. Measured on the JavaScript/TypeScript suite only — at least 54 test source file(s) (.scala) went unread, so its test quality is unmeasured and is not in these counts.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

3 outdated direct sbt declarations. An sbt declaration names an EXACT version, so the remedy is an edit to the build file — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it. Test-, Provided- and it-scoped declarations are excluded, because a consumer of this project never receives them. A version held in a Scala val is read only when the val is one string literal: sbt is a program rather than a manifest, and evaluating a computed version would invent the measurement rather than take it. Whether any artifact is DEPRECATED or ABANDONED is not graded and cannot be — Maven Central publishes no such marker, and release age does not stand in for one: the most widely depended-upon libraries are routinely the stalest, being finished rather than abandoned. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question.

Outdated: ch.qos.logback:logback-classic · ×3

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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 7 declared sbt dependency artifact(s) use a banned license. Licences were resolved from the POMs Maven Central publishes, over the production coordinates this repository's 1 sbt build file(s) (build.sbt and project/*.scala) declare with a literal version, directly or through a string-literal val — `%%` resolved to the Scala binary suffix Central publishes under, test-scoped declarations excluded — the same declaration-site closure this analysis reads for dependency currency. sbt has no lockfile a checkout carries, so this is deliberately NOT the transitive closure. 14 further production coordinate(s) are declared with a version the build computes rather than writes as a literal — sbt is a program, and this pass does not run it — and are NOT graded: this verdict covers what the build pins literally or through a string-literal val, not the full graph. ★ COVERAGE OF THIS VERDICT: it grades this repository's sbt dependencies and nothing else. The repository also declares REDACTED, and the licences of those dependencies were NOT read by this pass — a gap in this engine's coverage, not a statement about them. So this result says the graded closure carries no banned licence; it does NOT say this repository's licensing is clear.

✓ 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.

D16 · Bus Factor9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

3 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is ui/components/queue-details.tsx. Counted over 54 of the 142 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1
Further sole-owners (lower concentration)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

D17 · Explicit Debt9.9 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

4 deducted task-comment markers across 9653 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 9.9. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×4rest/rest-sqs-testing-amazon-java-sdk/src/test/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/integration/multisdk/MessageOperationsTests.scala:98

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with MessageOperationsTests.scala, SQSRestServerWithSdkV1Client.scala, QueueManagerActor.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  2. 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.

D19 · Documentation Quality10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether the project's documentation is clear, complete, and useful.

Method: Every README, docs/ document and root guide parsed by its markup and measured in Unicode letters. Published: a runnable or packaged .NET project whose README (or a document it links, or a root guide) shows no example, and a root README naming none of three or more projects. Overview, licence, boilerplate, wall-of-text, empty-section and XML-doc rows are measured and withheld (counted in gaps) after adjudication. Deterministic, exhaustive, advisory.

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

1 of 1 documentation facets pass in full. 2 document(s) read across 1 unit(s).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

D26 · Project Cohesion0.0 / 10Critical✓ 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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 2 build units (npm, sbt) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

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)3.2 / 10Weak✓ 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 3.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

49 finding(s): 0 critical, 37 high, 12 medium, 0 low. 34 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 1 file(s) — `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/BatchRequestsModule.scala` — so no absence of findings in them is evidence of anything, and nothing in them was analysed. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them. Separately, one or more rules could not re-parse an embedded snippet in 1 file(s) (e.g. a workflow `run:` block read as shell). Those files WERE scanned and their other rows are unaffected; only those rules' view of those snippets is missing.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

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

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
  2. No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 31 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 (31 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).
  3. No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 3 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 (3 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities1.1 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 1.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

17 finding(s): 1 critical, 11 high, 4 medium, 1 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 11 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (11). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Critical vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 3 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).

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

D31 · IaC & Container Security6.8 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

14 finding(s): 2 critical, 4 high, 5 medium, 3 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Critical IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 5 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (5). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).

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

D34 · Knowledge Freshness4.7 / 10Weak✓ 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 4.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

30 of 54 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx. Counted over 54 of the 142 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Orphaned file · ×28ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:1
Most significant orphaned file · ×2ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:1
Concentrated knowledge decay

What to do

  1. Resolve the 28 Orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with receive-messages-panel.tsx, create-queue-modal.tsx, MessageQueue.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (28 recommendation-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Most significant orphaned file finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness — start with generate-messages-modal.tsx, send-message-modal.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Concentrated knowledge decay finding(s) in Knowledge Freshness. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D35 · Change Coupling9.9 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

Strongest change-coupling: QueueActorMessageOps.scala↔QueueActorQueueOps.scala 56%

Change coupling: QueueActorMessageOps.scala ↔ QueueActorQueueOps.scalacore/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/QueueActorMessageOps.scala:1

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with QueueActorMessageOps.scala. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing2.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D43 · Malicious Dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.

Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.

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

No dependency in any ecosystem this repository declares is published as malicious.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AC2 · Forms & labels5.2 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

  • This <div> carries a click handler, which makes it a control, but it has no text, aria-label or labelled child (the icon-only case), so assistive tech has no name to announce for it. Note that switching it to <button type="button"> — the right fix for its keyboard operability — does not give it a name either: an icon-only button still needs one. Add visible text or an aria-label. (×4) — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:74, ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:135, ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:270, …
  • This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label htmlFor>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label. (×4) — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:324, ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:328, ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:307, …
  • This control has no associated label. Add a <label htmlFor> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it. (×2) — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:325, ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:313

What to do

  • Give every control a programmatic label (a <label for> / wrapping <label> / aria-label) and every button text — a placeholder is not a label.
AC3 · Page structure5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether pages declare a language (well-formed BCP-47) and a non-empty title, expose exactly one main landmark and a sane heading order with non-empty headings, keep zoom enabled, title their iframes, give data tables header cells, and avoid meta-refresh. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

Coverage: Population: the PARSED MARKUP documents (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx). The page-level checks — lang, title, single main landmark — fire ONCE PER FULL DOCUMENT (an <html> root) and never on a partial or component fragment, so a repo of fragments is assessed only on the per-element checks (heading order, table headers, iframe titles, meta-refresh, zoom). Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

  • No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>. — ui/app/layout.tsx:33
  • A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope). — ui/components/queue-details.tsx:205

What to do

  • Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.
AC4 · Keyboard semantics1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether interactive behaviour is keyboard-reachable — no click handler on a non-interactive element lacking a role, tabindex and key handler, no element the repo's own CSS styles `cursor: pointer` without giving it any of the three, no unfocusable element whose only binding is a mouse enter/leave pair or a double-click, no positive tabindex, no href-less anchor, no placeholder-href (#/javascript) link acting as a button. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: click handlers on non-interactive elements lacking role+tabindex+key handler, positive tabindex values, and href-less anchors. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: elements that pose a keyboard-semantics question, in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) — a non-natively-interactive element carrying a click handler, a double-click or hover enter/leave binding, a pointer-only gesture on a tabindex="0" element, or `cursor: pointer` from the repo's own CSS; an href-less or placeholder-href (#, javascript:) anchor; and any element with a positive tabindex. Natively interactive elements used correctly (<button>, <a href>, form controls) are NOT in the population — there is nothing to judge — so a page of nothing but correct controls gives AC4 nothing to measure. Keyboard reachability is judged from the markup, never from a rendered page. ★ An interactive element declared in a tagged-template (html`…`) or hyperscript frontend is NOT in this population — no producer reads either — so an empty population is reported as an analyzer gap, never as "this repository has no interactive elements".

  • A click handler on a plain element with no role and no tabindex: even where another element's key handler can reach it, assistive tech can neither focus it nor announce what it is. Use a <button>, or add role + tabIndex={0}. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:74
  • This <div role="dialog"> is a modal dialog, but focus is moved into it, but nothing keeps it there: Tab walks out to the page behind, so a keyboard or screen-reader user keeps acting on the content behind it (WCAG 2.4.3). Use a native <dialog> opened with showModal(), a dialog component that traps focus, or move focus to the dialog on open, trap Tab inside it (or make the page behind inert) and return focus to the control that opened it on close. (×3) — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:86, ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:142, ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:128
  • A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabIndex={0} + a key handler. (×3) — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:135, ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:270, ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:116
  • This <div> binds mouse-enter and mouse-leave and nothing else — no click, no key handler, no focus handler, and no tabIndex={0}, so it cannot even take focus. A keyboard user cannot hover, so whatever the pair reveals or highlights is reachable with a mouse only. Bind the same state to focus/blur as well, and add tabIndex={0}="0" so the element can receive that focus. — ui/components/queue-card.tsx:26
  • This <div role="dialog"> is a modal dialog, but nothing moves focus into it when it opens and nothing keeps focus inside it while it is open, so a keyboard or screen-reader user keeps acting on the content behind it (WCAG 2.4.3). Use a native <dialog> opened with showModal(), a dialog component that traps focus, or move focus to the dialog on open, trap Tab inside it (or make the page behind inert) and return focus to the control that opened it on close. — ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:282

What to do

  • Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.
AC5 · ARIA correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether ARIA is used correctly — valid non-abstract roles, the ARIA state a role requires, valid (non-misspelled) aria-* attribute names, in-enum values for token-typed aria-* attributes, and no aria-hidden on (or wrapping) a focusable element. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

Coverage: Population: elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) that carry a role or an aria-* attribute; roles and token values are checked against the ARIA enums exhaustively within that set. An expression-valued (dynamic) role or aria-* value is skipped rather than guessed, and markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

AC6 · Visual & motion safety6.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether focus outlines aren't removed without a replacement, motion respects prefers-reduced-motion, and literal CSS colour pairs meet contrast — PARTIAL: inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS literals are read (hex/rgb/hsl/named), never computed/runtime/external-CDN colour. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

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

Coverage: Population: styled elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx), plus in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files and CSS-in-JS literals. Colour contrast is computed from LITERAL colour pairs only (hex/rgb/hsl/named, including var() tokens and Tailwind neutral utilities) — computed, runtime-themed and external-CDN colour is never resolved, so this is a partial read of contrast by construction. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

  • <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 220ms cubic-bezier(0.34,1.56,0.64,1), opacity 200ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:. (×3) — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:97, ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:147, ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:139
  • <span> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 160ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:. (×4) — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:319, ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:430, ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:103, …
  • <div> moves — its inline style sets `animation: fadeUp 300ms ease both` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:. (×4) — ui/components/error-display.tsx:10, ui/components/queue-card.tsx:26, ui/components/queue-details.tsx:95, …
  • <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: width 200ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:230
  • <div> moves — its inline style sets `animation: shimmer 1.6s ease-in-out infinite` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:. — ui/components/loading-skeleton.tsx:36
  • <span> moves — its inline style sets `animation: autoRefreshDisabled` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:. (×2) — ui/components/queue-details.tsx:120, ui/components/queue-list.tsx:95
  • <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 250ms cubic-bezier(0.32,0.72,0,1)` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:. — ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:282
  • <textarea> takes keyboard focus, and outline:none/0 in its inline style removes the focus ring with no chance of a :focus replacement (an inline style outranks every stylesheet rule). Keep a visible focus indicator. — ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:245

What to do

  • Keep a visible focus style (don't remove the outline without a replacement), guard animation with prefers-reduced-motion, and raise low-contrast colour pairs to at least 4.5:1.
AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set, e.g. eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y or vuejs-accessibility where the project lints JavaScript) and an automated accessibility assertion wired into tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or an equivalent) — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.

Method: Repo config/CI scan: an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set such as eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility where JavaScript is linted) and an automated accessibility assertion in tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or equivalent), graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.

Coverage: Population: the repository's own tooling configuration — lint config, test and CI files — NOT the markup. It is read for a configured accessibility checker and an automated accessibility assertion (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse, or a native-toolkit equivalent), and it credits an INVOCATION, never a mention: a licence filename, an import comment or a doc reference earns no rung. Enforcement configured entirely outside the repository leaves no evidence here and cannot be credited.

  • No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 15 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

  • Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y, then assert with vitest-axe in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
AX10 · Code composition9.1 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.

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

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

What to do

  • The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
AX2 · Stateful singletons10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue in this repository's Scala: methods whose whole body is still `???` or a "not implemented" throw where nothing overrides them, and placeholder text (lorem ipsum, changeme/replace_me…) left in strings of 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 & stubs10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords, in this repository's Scala: methods whose body is `???` or only throws a "not implemented" error, methods that take inputs and return a constant or do nothing, dead `if (false)` branches, and skeleton classes most of whose methods are holes.

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.

M1 · Documentation (README)9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Add a README to the 1 of 2 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1 pts.
M2 · Architecture documentation2.0 / 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.

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.
M3 · Folder & project structure10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

M4 · Documentation accuracy10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

P2 · Observability5.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Only 1/2 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `ui`.

What to do

  • Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
  • Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-java or Micrometer) and a health-check endpoint (Spring Boot Actuator's /actuator/health, or a /health route) for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 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 scalafix or scapegoat (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 18995 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: scalafix or scapegoat — 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.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.
  • Deployment is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever reaches the release trigger goes to production unreviewed, so a mistaken merge or tag is live before anyone can stop it.

What to do

  • Add a `healthcheck:` to the served compose service — probing the endpoint it already answers on where it has one — with `depends_on: condition: service_healthy` on whatever waits for it, and keep the deployed image tag immutable and recorded so rolling back is re-pointing at the previous tag rather than rebuilding.
  • Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
P5 · DR & Backup0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

  • Codify backups + geo-recovery in IaC and document RTO/RPO and the restore procedure — a persistence guard alone is not disaster recovery.
P6 · Release Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene7.0 / 10Strong✓ 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.

  • `existsSync` in `start` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs. (×2) — integration-tests/nodejs/src/elasticmq-container.js:83, integration-tests/nodejs/src/elasticmq-container.js:90

What to do

  • TypeScript/JavaScript: use the promise APIs (fs/promises, a promisified child_process.execFile, the async zlib/crypto functions) and await them instead of the *Sync variants.
R1 · Type Safety9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Migrate the remaining .js/.jsx files to TypeScript.
R10 · Code Duplication6.9 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.

Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.

  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:69 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:111 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:69
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:130 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:111 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:130
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:345 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:365 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:345
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:302 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:277 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:302
  • ui/components/queue-details.tsx:24 · ui/components/queue-list.tsx:15 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 164 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — ui/components/queue-details.tsx:24
  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:325 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:483 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:325
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:8 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:8 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:8
  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12
  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:29 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:54 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:29
  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:274 · ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:414 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:451 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:274
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:414 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:451 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:414
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:37 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:36 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:37
  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:208 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:349 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:208
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:199 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:203 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:199
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:329 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:342 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:329
  • ui/components/queue-details.tsx:308 · ui/components/queue-details.tsx:322 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/queue-details.tsx:308
  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:132 · ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:314 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:132
  • ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:246 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:410 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:246
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:176 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:182 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:176
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:59 · ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:234 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 80 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:59
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:68 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:78 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:68

What to do

  • Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity6.9 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • GenerateMessagesModal has cyclomatic complexity 33 and cognitive complexity 30; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:29
  • SendMessageModal has cyclomatic complexity 19 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32
  • QueueDetails has cyclomatic complexity 16 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/queue-details.tsx:22
  • QueueList has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/queue-list.tsx:14
  • ReceiveMessagesPanel has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:219
  • CreateQueueModal has cyclomatic complexity 14 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12
  • sendMessage has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:103
  • createQueue has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — REDACTED:244
  • MessageCard has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:36
  • CardBtn has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/queue-card.tsx:134
  • QueueCard has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 11; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — ui/components/queue-card.tsx:16

What to do

  • Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
R3 · Large Files4.3 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx has 460 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:1
  • ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx has 457 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:1
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx has 410 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:1

What to do

  • Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
R4 · Test Coverage4.4 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.

Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.

  • No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one. (×10) — ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:1, ui/components/queue-details.tsx:1, ui/components/queue-list.tsx:1, …

What to do

  • Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).
R5 · Dependency Freshness8.1 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — How outdated the npm dependencies are (a maturity signal). JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30 (JS/npm Dependency Vulnerabilities).

Method: npm dependency staleness from manifest/registry metadata (a maturity signal; JS/npm CVEs are scored separately in D30, which answers dependency vulnerabilities for every ecosystem). Deterministic.

What to do

  • Bump outdated dependencies to current versions to limit upgrade debt.
R6 · Tooling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each REDACTED script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.

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

R7 · Dead Code10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • 3 file(s) (~370 LoC) were excluded from dead-code analysis. This package DOES declare main/module/exports — but every declared target is missing from the scanned tree, which is what a build-output entry (dist/, lib/, out/) looks like before the package is built. Point a declared target at the source entry, or build the package before scanning, so reachability can follow it. — integration-tests/nodejs
R8 · Dependency Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

R9 · Circular Imports10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

S1 · Web-Security Posture2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Read from this repository's Scala source and the Java beside it: cryptographic hygiene (weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source) and outbound TLS (certificate validation, protocol version) — facts about code that hold whether or not it serves anything itself. This repository serves HTTP itself (rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:330 — `newServerAt`), so its Scala source was also read for the server controls: TLS served or HSTS set, security response headers, cookie flags and inbound validation — each credited where its Scala spelling appears in production source, not proven on every route. A Play application is credited the security headers Play's default `SecurityHeadersFilter` sends unless its build or configuration switches that filter off, and its cookies the HttpOnly flag Play sets by default.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir source itself (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not) for the arms that hold whether or not the code serves HTTP: a weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source, a TLS client that accepts any certificate, and (JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Elixir) an obsolete TLS version; the server controls are not assessed there, and a Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir repository that serves no HTTP of its own is N/A on them. Deterministic.

  • MD5/SHA1 is computed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ (`MessageDigest.getInstance("SHA-256")`) for content integrity, or a KDF (bcrypt/Argon2/scrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, an avatar URL, an ETag), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as xxhash or murmurhash says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses. Where a protocol this code does not own fixes the digest (a k-anonymity range query, a legacy signature format), the protocol decides; say so beside the call. (×2) — rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:392, rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:440
  • This repository runs an HTTP server and nothing in its Scala source or committed configuration secures the transport: no HTTPS served (akka/pekko-http `ConnectionContext.httpsServer`/`enableHttps`, an http4s builder's `withTLS`, Jetty's `SslContextFactory`, zio-http's `SSLConfig`, Play's `https.port`), no `Strict-Transport-Security` header, HSTS middleware or Play `RedirectHttpsFilter`, no `X-Forwarded-Proto` read or Play `play.http.forwarded.trustedProxies` for a TLS-terminating proxy — so its traffic may cross the network in clear text. (−2.0 on this card.) The server: rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:330 — `newServerAt`.
  • None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is set on a response this repository's Scala server sends — defense in depth, even when a proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.) The server: rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:330 — `newServerAt`.
  • No handler of this repository's Scala server answers 400, 413 or 422 (`BadRequest`, `StatusCodes.BadRequest`, `Status.BadRequest`, `UnprocessableEntity`), and nothing declares validation — no Play `Form(mapping(…))` or `validate[T]`, no tapir `Validator`, no akka/pekko-http `validate(…)` or `withSizeLimit`, no validation library (refined, iron, accord, cats `Validated`, Jakarta Bean Validation) — nothing shows inbound requests being checked, and refused, before a handler acts on them. A check that answers its failure with 200 and an error body is not seen. (−2.0 on this card.) The server: rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:330 — `newServerAt`.

What to do

  • Review each MD5/SHA1 use by what it protects: replace it with SHA-256+ (or a KDF for passwords) where the digest is security-relevant, and switch it to a non-cryptographic hash (xxhash, murmurhash) where it only derives an identifier such as a cache key. This repository constructs a collision-broken hash (MD5/SHA1) at 2 sites, not one: `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:392` (MessageDigest.getInstance("MD5")), `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:440` (MessageDigest.getInstance("MD5")). Each is a separate decision — fixing only the line this row cites leaves the others in place.
  • Secure the server's transport: serve TLS itself (akka/pekko-http `ConnectionContext.httpsServer(sslContext)` with `newServerAt(…).enableHttps(…)`, an http4s server builder's `withTLS(…)`, Play's `https.port`), or run it behind a TLS-terminating proxy and trust it (`X-Forwarded-Proto`; Play `play.http.forwarded.trustedProxies`); send `Strict-Transport-Security` once it is HTTPS-only (http4s `HSTS(…)`, Play `RedirectHttpsFilter`).
  • Set security response headers on what the server sends — keep Play's `SecurityHeadersFilter` enabled, wrap akka/pekko-http routes in `respondWithHeaders(RawHeader("X-Content-Type-Options", "nosniff"), …)`, or add an http4s middleware that sets `Content-Security-Policy`, `X-Content-Type-Options` and a frame policy on every response.
  • Validate what the server reads from a request — path, query, headers, body size and shape — and answer what fails with 400 (413 for an oversized body) before a handler acts on it: a Play form or `validate[T]` answered with `BadRequest`, tapir `Validator`s on the endpoint's inputs, or akka/pekko-http's `validate(…)` and `withSizeLimit` directives.
X1 · Async correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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 reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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 correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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.

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 `NullPointerException` (Java, Kotlin, Scala), `ArgumentError.notNull` (Dart) or `ArgumentNullException` (F#'s `nullArg`) 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 an enhanced `for` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is iterating invalidates the fail-fast iterator it is holding, so the next `next()` throws `ConcurrentModificationException` and the remaining elements are never seen. Whether a `for` comprehension or `foreach` leaves the mutable collection it is walking alone — an `ArrayBuffer` or `ListBuffer` counts its changes and its iterator checks the count, an `ArrayDeque` (and `mutable.Queue`/`mutable.Stack`) is walked by index up to its starting length, and a `java.util` collection walked through `asScala` is fail-fast, so a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is walking makes a later step throw `ConcurrentModificationException` (`IndexOutOfBoundsException` for a deque) and the remaining elements 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 handling6.6 / 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. — ui/components/queue-card.tsx:107

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.

X5 · Nullable reference types2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether Scala's null is held to the type system and not undermined by assertions — a file compiled with `-Yexplicit-nulls` is one where `String` excludes null and `String | Null` admits it, a file under WartRemover's `Null` wart or Scalafix's `DisableSyntax.noNulls` is one whose code cannot write `null` and must say `Option`, and each `.nn`, `import scala.language.unsafeNulls` or null-lint suppression is the author overruling that.

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

  • No build over this repository's 118 Scala product file(s) passes `-Yexplicit-nulls`, enables WartRemover's `Null` wart or runs Scalafix's `DisableSyntax.noNulls`, so every reference type admits null and nothing reports a `null` written into the code or returned from a Java API — the first one to reach a method call is a `NullPointerException`. `Option` by convention is a habit no tool here holds the code to.

What to do

  • On Scala 3, add `-Yexplicit-nulls` to `scalacOptions` so `String` and `String | Null` mean different things, and type each Java API's result as nullable where it can return null; on Scala 2 (or as a first step), enable WartRemover's `Null` wart (`wartremoverErrors += Wart.Null`) or Scalafix's `DisableSyntax.noNulls = true` so the code holds absence in `Option`. Then pay the assertions down rather than adding to them: each `.nn` is a null the compiler could not rule out — wrap the Java value in `Option(…)` at the boundary, pattern-match on `null` once there, or change the API so the null cannot arrive; an `unsafeNulls` import switches the checking off for everything after it.

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 12 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (22%; ≈24% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 43 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

DimensionWCAG 2.2 A/AA criteriaCoverage
AC2 · Forms & labels1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC4 · Keyboard semantics2.1.1, 2.4.3Partial signal
AC5 · ARIA correctness4.1.2Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety1.4.3, 2.4.7Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcementenforcement — no page criterionEnforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 43 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.1.1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

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 Health55%Adequate — gated by X5Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture90%Adequate — gated by D26Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity67%Adequate — gated by M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness37%Weak — gated by P3, P5Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security35%Weak — gated by D29, D30, D36, S1Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility41%Weak — gated by AC4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance70%StrongStrongest area.
Unscored — 1 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.

  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 3 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

  • C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'scalikejdbc' (persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/DB.scala:2) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Slick table columns, CREATE TABLE and ALTER TABLE … ADD columns in SQL migrations). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether its changes need an audit trail could not be established, and the trail's absence is not scored.
  • C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'scalikejdbc' (persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/DB.scala:2) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Slick table columns, CREATE TABLE and ALTER TABLE … ADD columns in SQL migrations). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether a retention limit applies here could not be established, and its absence is not scored.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'scalikejdbc' (persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/DB.scala:2) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Slick table columns, CREATE TABLE and ALTER TABLE … ADD columns in SQL migrations). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether data-subject rights apply here could not be established, and their absence is not scored.
Not included — 44 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 image/media element found in the parsed markup — AC1 not applicable here.
  • AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's Java imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's Scala imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's TypeScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
  • AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — elasticmq-ui Pulling elasticmq Pulling elasticmq-ui Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden elasticmq Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: elasticmq Pulling elasticmq-ui Pulling elasticmq Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden elasticmq-ui Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
  • C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not scored — polyglot repository, one half's runner produced no measurement
  • D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D21 Naming Consistency — Naming consistency is measured on C# only; Java, JavaScript, Scala, TypeScript not measured.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D24 Comment Value — D24 reads C# and Visual Basic comments only — this repository's production source is .java, .scala, .ts, .tsx, which was left unread. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.scala), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 1 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life — Platform end-of-life not assessed — this repository declares no platform this pass reads
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
  • D8 Code Coverage — Coverage NOT MEASURED: the JavaScript/TypeScript half could not be measured — the jest suite in integration-tests/nodejs/ ran and not one test passed (FAIL test/basic.test.js), so the coverage report describes the failed run, not the code. Coverage is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero. The named suite step is one the repository's maintainers can perform; once it passes, the real number is measured on the next scan. Alternatively, commit the lcov/Cobertura report your CI produces and it is read without a re-run.
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (2 signals for this style, 2 needed — the count is met but a required primary signal is absent): 94 value object(s); 5 domain event(s); its domain events are published by services or handlers — no domain entity raises one
  • ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
  • P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JVM, JavaScript/TypeScript source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
  • P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (`addSbtPlugin("org.scoverage" % "sbt-scoverage" % "<version>")` in `project/plugins.sbt`, then `sbt clean coverage test coverageReport`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
  • PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for `@Benchmark` in a Java, Kotlin or Scala file importing JMH or kotlinx-benchmark, Jetpack Benchmark's `measureRepeated` in a file importing androidx.benchmark, or JMH/kotlinx-benchmark/androidx.benchmark in a pom.xml, Gradle or sbt build, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: allocation awareness is rated where code engineers for it — at least 400 production lines that ship benchmarks or already use allocation-aware idioms (8 or more). This repository's Java and Scala code has 7,720 production line(s), 7 such use(s) and no benchmarks, so there is no allocation work to rate. The card is reward-only: its absence costs nothing.
  • R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Scala and Java were read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Scala request takes no token: a Future cannot be cancelled, and cats-effect, ZIO and Monix interrupt the fiber that made the request from outside the call, not through a parameter; a Java request off Android takes no token: it is cancelled through the handle it returns (Future.cancel, Call.cancel, a Disposable), ambiently (io.grpc.Context) or by interrupting its thread, not through a parameter
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X4 Structured logging — This check asks whether log calls keep a message's values apart from its text, which needs a logger that can carry them as fields. This repository's Java was read, and it logs through none that an assembled message defeats: java.util.logging's level methods, log4j 1, commons-logging, JBoss Logging and Flogger take one finished message (as log4net does in C#), or it makes no call through a named logger at all. Calls made through SLF4J or log4j 2 (`org.slf4j.Logger`, `org.apache.logging.log4j.Logger`, Lombok's `@Slf4j`) would be judged.
  • 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 — 70 finding(s)
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 6 more in this group — see findings.md.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×11
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AC2 · Forms & labels · Custom control with no accessible name on <div> · ×4
  • Custom control with no accessible name on <div> ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:74 — This <div> carries a click handler, which makes it a control, but it has no text, aria-label or labelled child (the icon-only case), so assistive tech has no name to announce for it. Note that switching it to <button type="button"> — the right fix for its keyboard operability — does not give it a name either: an icon-only button still needs one. Add visible text or an aria-label.
  • Custom control with no accessible name on <div> ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:135 — This <div> carries a click handler, which makes it a control, but it has no text, aria-label or labelled child (the icon-only case), so assistive tech has no name to announce for it. Note that switching it to <button type="button"> — the right fix for its keyboard operability — does not give it a name either: an icon-only button still needs one. Add visible text or an aria-label.
  • Custom control with no accessible name on <div> ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:270 — This <div> carries a click handler, which makes it a control, but it has no text, aria-label or labelled child (the icon-only case), so assistive tech has no name to announce for it. Note that switching it to <button type="button"> — the right fix for its keyboard operability — does not give it a name either: an icon-only button still needs one. Add visible text or an aria-label.
  • Custom control with no accessible name on <div> ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:116 — This <div> carries a click handler, which makes it a control, but it has no text, aria-label or labelled child (the icon-only case), so assistive tech has no name to announce for it. Note that switching it to <button type="button"> — the right fix for its keyboard operability — does not give it a name either: an icon-only button still needs one. Add visible text or an aria-label.
AC2 · Forms & labels · <input> without a programmatic label · ×4
  • <input> without a programmatic label ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:324 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label htmlFor>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
  • <input> without a programmatic label ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:328 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label htmlFor>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
  • <input> without a programmatic label ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:307 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label htmlFor>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
  • <input> without a programmatic label ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:330 — This control has only a placeholder — a placeholder is not a label (it vanishes on input and many AT ignore it). Add a <label htmlFor>, a wrapping <label>, or aria-label.
AC4 · Keyboard semantics · Click handler on a non-interactive <div> · ×4
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:74 — A click handler on a plain element with no role and no tabindex: even where another element's key handler can reach it, assistive tech can neither focus it nor announce what it is. Use a <button>, or add role + tabIndex={0}.
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:135 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabIndex={0} + a key handler.
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:270 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabIndex={0} + a key handler.
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:116 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabIndex={0} + a key handler.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×4
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AC2 · Forms & labels · <select> without a programmatic label · ×2
  • <select> without a programmatic label ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:325 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label htmlFor> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
  • <select> without a programmatic label ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:313 — This control has no associated label. Add a <label htmlFor> / wrapping <label> / aria-label / aria-labelledby so assistive tech can name it.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Critical IaC · ×2
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AC4 · Keyboard semantics · Hover-only interaction on <div> · ×1
  • Hover-only interaction on <div> ui/components/queue-card.tsx:26 — This <div> binds mouse-enter and mouse-leave and nothing else — no click, no key handler, no focus handler, and no tabIndex={0}, so it cannot even take focus. A keyboard user cannot hover, so whatever the pair reveals or highlights is reachable with a mouse only. Bind the same state to focus/blur as well, and add tabIndex={0}="0" so the element can receive that focus.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical vulnerability · ×1
  • REDACTED
Serious — 134 finding(s)
AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard · ×16
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:97 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 220ms cubic-bezier(0.34,1.56,0.64,1), opacity 200ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:319 — <span> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 160ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/error-display.tsx:10 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `animation: fadeUp 300ms ease both` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:147 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 220ms cubic-bezier(0.34,1.56,0.64,1), opacity 200ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:230 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: width 200ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:430 — <span> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 160ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/loading-skeleton.tsx:36 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `animation: shimmer 1.6s ease-in-out infinite` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/queue-card.tsx:26 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `animation: fadeUp 300ms ease both` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/queue-details.tsx:95 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `animation: fadeUp 300ms ease both` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/queue-details.tsx:120 — <span> moves — its inline style sets `animation: autoRefreshDisabled` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/queue-list.tsx:50 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `animation: fadeUp 300ms ease both` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/queue-list.tsx:95 — <span> moves — its inline style sets `animation: autoRefreshDisabled` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:103 — <span> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 160ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:282 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 250ms cubic-bezier(0.32,0.72,0,1)` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:139 — <div> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 220ms cubic-bezier(0.34,1.56,0.64,1), opacity 200ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:477 — <span> moves — its inline style sets `transition: transform 160ms ease` — and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it, so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Gate it on @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference) or motion-safe:.
R4 · Test Coverage · No test reaches this file · ×10
  • No test reaches this file ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/components/queue-details.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/components/queue-list.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/lib/theme-provider.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/components/page-header.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/components/loading-skeleton.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/components/theme-switcher.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/app/layout.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/app/queues/[name]/page.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
  • No test reaches this file ui/app/page.tsx:1 — No test imports this module directly or transitively. Import reachability cannot see a test that executes a file by path instead of importing it, nor one that drives it through a running browser by navigating to a URL — if neither does, no test reaches this one.
D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×8
  • FunctionTooLong: send-message-modal.SendMessageModal ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32 — FunctionTooLong — SendMessageModal runs 336 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 236 over it, 3.36× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:29 — FunctionTooLong — GenerateMessagesModal runs 307 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 207 over it, 3.07× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12 — FunctionTooLong — CreateQueueModal runs 217 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 117 over it, 2.17× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: queue-details.QueueDetails ui/components/queue-details.tsx:22 — FunctionTooLong — QueueDetails runs 202 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 102 over it, 2.02× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: receive-messages-panel.ReceiveMessagesPanel ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:219 — FunctionTooLong — ReceiveMessagesPanel runs 168 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 68 over it, 1.68× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: receive-messages-panel.MessageCard ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:36 — FunctionTooLong — MessageCard runs 153 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 53 over it, 1.53× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: queue-list.QueueList ui/components/queue-list.tsx:14 — FunctionTooLong — QueueList runs 138 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 38 over it, 1.38× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: queue-card.QueueCard ui/components/queue-card.tsx:16 — FunctionTooLong — QueueCard runs 104 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 4 over it, 1.04× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×5
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AC4 · Keyboard semantics · Modal dialog does not manage focus · ×4
  • Modal dialog does not manage focus ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:86 — This <div role="dialog"> is a modal dialog, but focus is moved into it, but nothing keeps it there: Tab walks out to the page behind, so a keyboard or screen-reader user keeps acting on the content behind it (WCAG 2.4.3). Use a native <dialog> opened with showModal(), a dialog component that traps focus, or move focus to the dialog on open, trap Tab inside it (or make the page behind inert) and return focus to the control that opened it on close.
  • Modal dialog does not manage focus ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:142 — This <div role="dialog"> is a modal dialog, but focus is moved into it, but nothing keeps it there: Tab walks out to the page behind, so a keyboard or screen-reader user keeps acting on the content behind it (WCAG 2.4.3). Use a native <dialog> opened with showModal(), a dialog component that traps focus, or move focus to the dialog on open, trap Tab inside it (or make the page behind inert) and return focus to the control that opened it on close.
  • Modal dialog does not manage focus ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:282 — This <div role="dialog"> is a modal dialog, but nothing moves focus into it when it opens and nothing keeps focus inside it while it is open, so a keyboard or screen-reader user keeps acting on the content behind it (WCAG 2.4.3). Use a native <dialog> opened with showModal(), a dialog component that traps focus, or move focus to the dialog on open, trap Tab inside it (or make the page behind inert) and return focus to the control that opened it on close.
  • Modal dialog does not manage focus ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:128 — This <div role="dialog"> is a modal dialog, but focus is moved into it, but nothing keeps it there: Tab walks out to the page behind, so a keyboard or screen-reader user keeps acting on the content behind it (WCAG 2.4.3). Use a native <dialog> opened with showModal(), a dialog component that traps focus, or move focus to the dialog on open, trap Tab inside it (or make the page behind inert) and return focus to the control that opened it on close.
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×4
  • TodoComment rest/rest-sqs-testing-amazon-java-sdk/src/test/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/integration/multisdk/MessageOperationsTests.scala:98 — // TODO: check error type returned by SQS — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment rest/rest-sqs-testing-amazon-java-sdk/src/test/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/integration/common/SQSRestServerWithSdkV1Client.scala:78 — // TODO: Figure out why this intermittently isn't able to unbind cleanly — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/QueueManagerActor.scala:25 — // TODO: create *Ops class like in QueueActor — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/ReceiveRequestAttemptCache.scala:21 — // TODO: Rather than do this on every add, maybe this could be done periodically? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking · ×2
  • Sync-over-async blocking integration-tests/nodejs/src/elasticmq-container.js:83 — `existsSync` in `start` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
  • Sync-over-async blocking integration-tests/nodejs/src/elasticmq-container.js:90 — `existsSync` in `start` blocks the event loop until it finishes — a blocking call inside async code stalls the event loop — every other request waits for as long as it runs.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:29 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:29 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:54 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:208 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:208 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:349 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:199 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:199 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:203 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:329 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:329 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:342 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/queue-details.tsx:308 — ui/components/queue-details.tsx:308 · ui/components/queue-details.tsx:322 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:132 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:132 · ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:314 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:246 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:246 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:410 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · Weak hash algorithm · ×2
  • Weak hash algorithm rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:392 — MD5/SHA1 is computed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ (`MessageDigest.getInstance("SHA-256")`) for content integrity, or a KDF (bcrypt/Argon2/scrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, an avatar URL, an ETag), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as xxhash or murmurhash says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses. Where a protocol this code does not own fixes the digest (a k-anonymity range query, a legacy signature format), the protocol decides; say so beside the call.
  • Weak hash algorithm rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:440 — MD5/SHA1 is computed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ (`MessageDigest.getInstance("SHA-256")`) for content integrity, or a KDF (bcrypt/Argon2/scrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, an avatar URL, an ETag), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as xxhash or murmurhash says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses. Where a protocol this code does not own fixes the digest (a k-anonymity range query, a legacy signature format), the protocol decides; say so beside the call.
AC3 · Page structure · Page without a main landmark · ×1
  • Page without a main landmark ui/app/layout.tsx:33 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. Wrap the primary content in <main>.
AC3 · Page structure · Data table has no header cells · ×1
  • Data table has no header cells ui/components/queue-details.tsx:205 — A <table> with data cells but no <th> gives assistive technology no way to associate cells with their headers. Mark the header row/column cells as <th> (with a scope).
AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Focus outline removed inline · ×1
  • Focus outline removed inline ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:245 — <textarea> takes keyboard focus, and outline:none/0 in its inline style removes the focus ring with no chance of a :focus replacement (an inline style outranks every stylesheet rule). Keep a visible focus indicator.
AC7 · A11y enforcement · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1
  • Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 15 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cyclomatic 44) · ×1
  • generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cyclomatic 44) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:29 — generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal has cyclomatic complexity 44 (threshold 15). Of this number, 33 points are the body's own statements and 11 belong to 3 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · send-message-modal.SendMessageModal (cyclomatic 29) · ×1
  • send-message-modal.SendMessageModal (cyclomatic 29) ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32 — send-message-modal.SendMessageModal has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). Of this number, 19 points are the body's own statements and 10 belong to 4 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · queue-details.QueueDetails (cyclomatic 26) · ×1
  • queue-details.QueueDetails (cyclomatic 26) ui/components/queue-details.tsx:22 — queue-details.QueueDetails has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). Of this number, 16 points are the body's own statements and 10 belong to 4 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal (cyclomatic 25) · ×1
  • create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal (cyclomatic 25) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12 — create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). Of this number, 14 points are the body's own statements and 11 belong to 4 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · SendMessageDirectives.createMessage (cyclomatic 22) · ×1
  • SendMessageDirectives.createMessage (cyclomatic 22) rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SendMessageDirectives.scala:76 — SendMessageDirectives.createMessage has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · queue-list.QueueList (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • queue-list.QueueList (cyclomatic 21) ui/components/queue-list.tsx:14 — queue-list.QueueList has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 6 belong to 3 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · receive-messages-panel.ReceiveMessagesPanel (cyclomatic 19) · ×1
  • receive-messages-panel.ReceiveMessagesPanel (cyclomatic 19) ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:219 — receive-messages-panel.ReceiveMessagesPanel has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 15 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 2 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · receive-messages-panel.MessageCard (cyclomatic 17) · ×1
  • receive-messages-panel.MessageCard (cyclomatic 17) ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:36 — receive-messages-panel.MessageCard has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). Of this number, 13 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 3 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · QueueManagerActor.receiveAndReply (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • QueueManagerActor.receiveAndReply (cyclomatic 16) core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/QueueManagerActor.scala:26 — QueueManagerActor.receiveAndReply has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal (cognitive 34) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:29 — generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 15 (29 pts), boolean chains 17, if/else 2 (3 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 17). 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. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal::handleGenerate) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · send-message-modal.SendMessageModal (cognitive 29) · ×1
  • send-message-modal.SendMessageModal (cognitive 29) ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32 — send-message-modal.SendMessageModal has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: boolean chains 15, ternaries 9 (12 pts), error handling 1, if/else 1 (nesting depth added 3). Of this number, 16 points are the body's own statements and 13 belong to 4 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, name the conditions: bind each compound test to a well-named local or a small predicate function, so the body reads as a sequence of named decisions rather than a chain of operators.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · queue-details.QueueDetails (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • queue-details.QueueDetails (cognitive 25) ui/components/queue-details.tsx:22 — queue-details.QueueDetails has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (8 pts), boolean chains 7, ternaries 5 (7 pts), error handling 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 4). Most of this is not in the body itself: 12 of the 25 points are its own statements and the rest belongs to 4 function literals inside it that branch (lines 35, 147, 51, …). The decisions are inside those literals, which nothing outside this body can call, review or test on its own, so splitting the enclosing body is not the move available here. To reduce it, lift the literals' work into a named function or method at the enclosing scope and have each literal call it, then reduce whichever part then reads as the largest.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal (cognitive 24) · ×1
  • create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal (cognitive 24) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12 — create-queue-modal.CreateQueueModal has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 12 (13 pts), boolean chains 7, if/else 3, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 1). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 12 belong to 4 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · queue-list.QueueList (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • queue-list.QueueList (cognitive 20) ui/components/queue-list.tsx:14 — queue-list.QueueList has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 8 (9 pts), if/else 7, boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 1). Of this number, 13 points are the body's own statements and 7 belong to 3 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · queue-details.ActionBtn (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • queue-details.ActionBtn (cognitive 19) ui/components/queue-details.tsx:283 — queue-details.ActionBtn has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 8 (11 pts), if/else 8 (nesting depth added 3). Of this number, 11 points are the body's own statements and 8 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal · ×1
  • generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal::handleGenerate (cognitive 18) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:71 — generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal::handleGenerate has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 3 (9 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (2 pts), if/else 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (generate-messages-modal.GenerateMessagesModal) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Limits.verifyQueueName (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • Limits.verifyQueueName (cognitive 17) core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/Limits.scala:158 — Limits.verifyQueueName has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (6 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TheSQSRestServerBuilder.start (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • TheSQSRestServerBuilder.start (cognitive 16) rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:137 — TheSQSRestServerBuilder.start has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (12 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · queue-card.QueueCard (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • queue-card.QueueCard (cognitive 16) ui/components/queue-card.tsx:16 — queue-card.QueueCard has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 9 (10 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (2 pts), if/else 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 3). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · queue-card.CardBtn (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • queue-card.CardBtn (cognitive 16) ui/components/queue-card.tsx:134 — queue-card.CardBtn has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 7 (10 pts), boolean chains 3, if/else 3 (nesting depth added 3). Of this number, 13 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · receive-messages-panel.MessageCard (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • receive-messages-panel.MessageCard (cognitive 16) ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:36 — receive-messages-panel.MessageCard has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 6 (7 pts), boolean chains 6, if/else 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 1). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 4 belong to 3 function items inside it that branch. To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×1
  • REDACTED
D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×1
  • Change coupling: QueueActorMessageOps.scala ↔ QueueActorQueueOps.scala core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/QueueActorMessageOps.scala:1 — `core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/QueueActorMessageOps.scala` and `core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/QueueActorQueueOps.scala` change together 56% of the time (9 of the 16 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 9 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `2f57dbe0` Cross compile with Scala 3 (#931); `fac8feb6` update dlq logic; `a7e3aabe` update to allow dlq to be defined after creation, and to allow tags o… — run `git show` on any of them.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×1
  • Off the main sequence: core — core: abstractness 0.24, instability 0.00, distance 0.76 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 3 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
D8 · Code Coverage · Coverage not measured · ×1
  • Coverage not measured — JavaScript/TypeScript suite — Coverage NOT MEASURED: the JavaScript/TypeScript half could not be measured — the jest suite in integration-tests/nodejs/ ran and not one test passed (FAIL test/basic.test.js), so the coverage report describes the failed run, not the code. Coverage is excluded from the score rather than counted as a near-zero. The named suite step is one the repository's maintainers can perform; once it passes, the real number is measured on the next scan. Alternatively, commit the lcov/Cobertura report your CI produces and it is read without a re-run.
P5 · DR & Backup · No DR/backup evidence · ×1
  • No DR/backup evidence — A persistence guard (data volume / purge-protection) was found, but no backup, geo-recovery or RTO/RPO controls were evidenced — a volume that survives a container recreate is not a tested restore from catastrophic loss.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (50 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (50 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:69 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:69 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:111 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (36 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (36 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:130 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:130 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:111 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (26 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (26 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:345 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:345 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:365 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:302 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:302 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:277 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (20 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (20 matched lines × 2 locations) ui/components/queue-details.tsx:24 — ui/components/queue-details.tsx:24 · ui/components/queue-list.tsx:15 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 164 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:325 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:325 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:483 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:8 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:8 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:8 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 3 locations) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:274 — ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:274 · ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:414 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:451 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:414 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:414 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:451 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:37 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:37 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:36 — the 2 copies sit in sibling files in one directory, so check first whether one of them (or an existing module there) already owns this behaviour and the others should call it; otherwise extract it into one module in that directory and have each site call it.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:176 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:176 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:182 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the SHAPE of this repetition could not be determined. It is not a run of declarations, a listing, a declaration header, a type body or a slice through a construct — and it was not measured as a run of executable statements either, so this row cannot tell you whether a function can stand where these lines are. Read the two spans before acting, because the move is opposite in the two cases. Where they are statements, the ordinary answer holds: give the shared part one home and call it from each site. Where they turn out to be declarations, a literal's entries, or the cases of an enumeration, there is no call site to call anything from, and collapsing them would delete what each copy pins — a shared base type, a generated set, or one exported constant each site refers to is the move instead, and sometimes the honest answer is that there is nothing to extract at all. Reported because the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is true whichever of those they are.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (7 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (7 matched lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:59 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:59 · ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:234 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 80 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:68 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:68 · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:78 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function GenerateMessagesModal (cyclomatic 33, cognitive 30) · ×1
  • Complex function GenerateMessagesModal (cyclomatic 33, cognitive 30) ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:29 — GenerateMessagesModal has cyclomatic complexity 33 and cognitive complexity 30; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function SendMessageModal (cyclomatic 19, cognitive 17) · ×1
  • Complex function SendMessageModal (cyclomatic 19, cognitive 17) ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:32 — SendMessageModal has cyclomatic complexity 19 and cognitive complexity 17; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function QueueDetails (cyclomatic 16, cognitive 15) · ×1
  • Complex function QueueDetails (cyclomatic 16, cognitive 15) ui/components/queue-details.tsx:22 — QueueDetails has cyclomatic complexity 16 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function QueueList (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 14) · ×1
  • Complex function QueueList (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 14) ui/components/queue-list.tsx:14 — QueueList has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function ReceiveMessagesPanel (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 12) · ×1
  • Complex function ReceiveMessagesPanel (cyclomatic 15, cognitive 12) ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:219 — ReceiveMessagesPanel has cyclomatic complexity 15 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function CreateQueueModal (cyclomatic 14, cognitive 12) · ×1
  • Complex function CreateQueueModal (cyclomatic 14, cognitive 12) ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:12 — CreateQueueModal has cyclomatic complexity 14 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function sendMessage (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 16) · ×1
  • Complex function sendMessage (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 16) REDACTED:103 — sendMessage has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 16; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function createQueue (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 13) · ×1
  • Complex function createQueue (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 13) REDACTED:244 — createQueue has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 13; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function MessageCard (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 12) · ×1
  • Complex function MessageCard (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 12) ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:36 — MessageCard has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 12; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function CardBtn (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 10) · ×1
  • Complex function CardBtn (cyclomatic 13, cognitive 10) ui/components/queue-card.tsx:134 — CardBtn has cyclomatic complexity 13 and cognitive complexity 10; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function QueueCard (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 11) · ×1
  • Complex function QueueCard (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 11) ui/components/queue-card.tsx:16 — QueueCard has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 11; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R3 · Large Files · ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx · ×1
  • ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx: 460 lines of code ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:1 — ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx has 460 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx · ×1
  • ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx: 457 lines of code ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:1 — ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx has 457 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx · ×1
  • ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx: 410 lines of code ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:1 — ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx has 410 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×1
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) ui/components/queue-card.tsx:107 — 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.
Minor — 52 finding(s)
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Orphaned file · ×28
  • Orphaned file ui/components/receive-messages-panel.tsx:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file ui/components/create-queue-modal.tsx:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/MessageQueue.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file REDACTED:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/QueueAttributesOps.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file ui/components/queue-card.tsx:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/Limits.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/operations/MoveMessagesAsyncOps.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/SqlQueuePersistenceActor.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/TagQueueDirectives.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/ListMessageMoveTasksDirectives.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/operations/ReceiveMessageOps.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/StartMessageMoveTaskDirectives.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file persistence/persistence-file/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/file/QueueConfigUtil.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/DBMessage.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/FifoDeduplicationIdsHistory.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/QueueManagerMessageMoveOps.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file persistence/persistence-sql/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/sql/MessageRepository.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/QueueActorStorage.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/metrics/MBeanMetrics.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file core/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/actor/queue/ReceiveRequestAttemptCache.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/ListDeadLetterSourceQueuesDirectives.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file persistence/persistence-file/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/persistence/file/QueuePersister.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/CancelMessageMoveTaskDirectives.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • Orphaned file rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/MessageAttributesSupport.scala:1 — No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
  • + 3 more in this group — see findings.md.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Most significant orphaned file · ×2
  • Most significant orphaned file ui/components/generate-messages-modal.tsx:1 — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
  • Most significant orphaned file ui/components/send-message-modal.tsx:1 — One of the orphaned files carrying the most lost knowledge — ranked by size weighted by the file's role in the codebase, the same weighting behind the score above, so core code outranks equally large plumbing. A reasonable place to start a read-through before the aggregate risk above bites.
D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1
  • Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 2 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: ui/components/queue-details.tsx, ui/components/queue-list.tsx. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
D16 · Bus Factor · Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1
  • Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 1 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (3 single-owned of 54 analysed files in total, counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated, example/demo and scaffolding-template trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 54 of the 142 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #2 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above. The files folded here: rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/BatchRequestsModule.scala.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D26 · Project Cohesion · Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1
  • Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 2 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `(repository root)` (6619 LoC, 372 module-visible types across 18 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Low CVE · ×1
  • REDACTED
D34 · Knowledge Freshness · Concentrated knowledge decay · ×1
  • Concentrated knowledge decay — 30 of 54 significant files have no living knowledge, while the repository is still being changed at a low rate (27 commit(s) in the last 90 days) — so this is one repo-wide knowledge-decay state, not 30 separate risks. Counted over 54 of the 142 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over. The code moved on without the people who understood these files: document them or schedule a read-through before the next change lands in them.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
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.
P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1
  • Logging is not universal — Only 1/2 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `ui`.
P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1
  • No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add scalafix or scapegoat (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 18995 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.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No rollback/health safety · ×1
  • No rollback/health safety — Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No release approval gate · ×1
  • No release approval gate — Deployment is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever reaches the release trigger goes to production unreviewed, so a mistaken merge or tag is live before anyone can stop it.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · No app-layer HTTPS enforcement detected · ×1
  • No app-layer HTTPS enforcement detected — This repository runs an HTTP server and nothing in its Scala source or committed configuration secures the transport: no HTTPS served (akka/pekko-http `ConnectionContext.httpsServer`/`enableHttps`, an http4s builder's `withTLS`, Jetty's `SslContextFactory`, zio-http's `SSLConfig`, Play's `https.port`), no `Strict-Transport-Security` header, HSTS middleware or Play `RedirectHttpsFilter`, no `X-Forwarded-Proto` read or Play `play.http.forwarded.trustedProxies` for a TLS-terminating proxy — so its traffic may cross the network in clear text. (−2.0 on this card.) The server: rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:330 — `newServerAt`.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · No security response headers detected · ×1
  • No security response headers detected — None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is set on a response this repository's Scala server sends — defense in depth, even when a proxy could set them. (−2.0 on this card.) The server: rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:330 — `newServerAt`.
S1 · Web-Security Posture · No inbound request validation detected · ×1
  • No inbound request validation detected — No handler of this repository's Scala server answers 400, 413 or 422 (`BadRequest`, `StatusCodes.BadRequest`, `Status.BadRequest`, `UnprocessableEntity`), and nothing declares validation — no Play `Form(mapping(…))` or `validate[T]`, no tapir `Validator`, no akka/pekko-http `validate(…)` or `withSizeLimit`, no validation library (refined, iron, accord, cats `Validated`, Jakarta Bean Validation) — nothing shows inbound requests being checked, and refused, before a handler acts on them. A check that answers its failure with 200 and an error body is not seen. (−2.0 on this card.) The server: rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/SQSRestServerBuilder.scala:330 — `newServerAt`.
X5 · Nullable reference types · Scala's null is not held to the type system everywhere · ×1
  • Scala's null is not held to the type system everywhere — No build over this repository's 118 Scala product file(s) passes `-Yexplicit-nulls`, enables WartRemover's `Null` wart or runs Scalafix's `DisableSyntax.noNulls`, so every reference type admits null and nothing reports a `null` written into the code or returned from a Java API — the first one to reach a method call is a `NullPointerException`. `Option` by convention is a habit no tool here holds the code to.
X7 · Silent fallback defaults · Silent fallback default in catch · ×1
  • Silent fallback default in catch ui/lib/theme-provider.tsx:19 — `ThemeProvider` swallows every exception into `return 'auto'` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
Minor — 3 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×3
  • Outdated: ch.qos.logback:logback-classic — `ch.qos.logback %% logback-classic` is declared at 1.3.16 in build.sbt, but 1.6.6 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 1.3.16 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
  • Outdated: com.amazonaws:aws-java-sdk-sqs — `com.amazonaws %% aws-java-sdk-sqs` is declared at 1.12.699 in build.sbt, but 1.12.797 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 1.12.699 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.
  • Outdated: software.amazon.awssdk:sqs — `software.amazon.awssdk %% sqs` is declared at 2.25.60 in build.sbt, but 2.57.3 is the current release on Maven Central. An sbt declaration names an exact version, so this repository builds against 2.25.60 until the declaration is edited — there is no lockfile refresh that would move it.

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-08810785e26f438bb28e445827854c64/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-08810785e26f438bb28e445827854c64/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 --exclude *.arrow --exclude *.avro --exclude *.csv --exclude *.dat --exclude *.db --exclude *.feather --exclude *.geojson --exclude *.h5 --exclude *.hdf5 --exclude *.jsonl --exclude *.log --exclude *.ndjson --exclude *.npy --exclude *.npz --exclude *.orc --exclude *.parquet --exclude *.pickle --exclude *.pkl --exclude *.psv --exclude *.sqlite --exclude *.sqlite3 --exclude *.tfrecord --exclude *.tsv --exclude *.txt .49artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update17artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy config --format json --quiet .14artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 1 file(s) — `rest/rest-sqs/src/main/scala/org/elasticmq/rest/sqs/BatchRequestsModule.scala` — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover them at all.0—
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 Dependenciestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update0artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a17686-2930-7715-8142-97a12750703d · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Issues: 70 · Warnings: 134 · Recommendations: 52 · Info: 3 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 26-10-2026 @ 04:44 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