Windy3f3f3f3f/claude-code-from-scratch

Repository: https://github.com/Windy3f3f3f3f/claude-code-from-scratch
Commit: acc4c34f062b9fbc289ef9cc2be339ba4e970347
Generated: 2026-11-14T00:15:30+00:00
Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-4+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2

Scores

Pillar	Score	Signal	Confidence	Coverage
AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share)	0	possible	64%	100%
Code quality	52	weak	90%	100%
Security	62	weak	85%	100%

AI provenance

Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development.

Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 46.5%
Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%
AI tooling configured in repo: claude-code
Stylometry index: 0.88 per 1,000 lines (narrated steps 4, placeholders 0, assistant phrasing 0, emoji 16). Reported as a signal, not scored.

Month	Lines added	Attributed to AI
2026-03	1,386	0%
2026-04	13,621	0%
2026-05	32	0%
2026-07	7,916	0%
2026-10	145	0%

Evidence

.claude/agents/reviewer.md (claude-code configuration) (.claude/agen)
.claude/rules/chinese-greeting.md (claude-code configuration) (.claude/rule)
.claude/skills/commit/SKILL.md (claude-code configuration) (.claude/skil)
.claude/skills/greet/SKILL.md (claude-code configuration) (.claude/skil)
CLAUDE.md (claude-code configuration) (CLAUDE.md)
5,220 lines of first-party code in ~4.2h (1,244 lines/hour, 2 commit session) (a485299eb5c8)
3,363 lines of first-party code in ~4.0h (841 lines/hour, 1 commit session) (a51d90943014)
2,167 lines of first-party code in ~4.0h (542 lines/hour, 1 commit session) (3abb94529476)
step-by-step narration comment: // Step 1: Deny rules always win — even bypassPermissions (--yolo) is (src/tools.ts)
step-by-step narration comment: // Step 2: Plan mode's read-only contract beats allow rules and bypass: (src/tools.ts)
step-by-step narration comment: // Step 3: Mode-specific logic (src/tools.ts)
step-by-step narration comment: // Step 3: Built-in dangerous pattern checks (src/tools.ts)

AI provenance describes how code was produced; it is not a quality judgment. Unless attribution is explicit, these are signals consistent with AI generation, not proof. Squash/rebase workflows, imported code, and rewritten history reduce accuracy.

Code quality

Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.14, no CI test run detected; 25% of function code in complex or long functions; 5% duplicated lines. Weakest area: type safety.

Area	Score
Complexity (lizard)	47
Duplication	76
Code smells (Opengrep)	67
Tests and CI	31
Documentation	65
Type safety	30
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance)	n/a

Functions: 749; mean complexity 4.2, 90th percentile 10; 30 complex and 6 long functions
Duplicated lines: 4.7% of 10,522 compared
Tests: 1,970 test lines for 13,707 source lines (ratio 0.14); CI test commands: none detected; 9% of recent source commits also change tests
Docs missing or thin: contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is weak: 9 known vulnerabilities in 3 dependencies; 11 high-severity SAST findings. Weakest area: posture.

Area	Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history)	97
Static analysis (Opengrep)	32
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV)	79
CI workflows (zizmor)	n/a
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles)	0
OpenSSF Scorecard	n/a

Known vulnerabilities: 9 in 3 packages (critical 0, high 5, medium 4, low 0)
Posture checks passed: lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits

Top findings

Severity	Finding	Location
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-asyncio-create-exec-audit`: Detected 'create_subprocess_exec' function without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low]	python/mini_claude/mcp_client.py:41
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-asyncio-create-exec-tainted-env-args`: Detected 'create_subprocess_exec' function with user controlled data. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low]	python/mini_claude/mcp_client.py:41
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit`: Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low]	python/mini_claude/tools.py:356
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit`: Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low]	python/mini_claude/tools.py:428
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.subprocess-shell-true`: Found 'subprocess' function 'run' with 'shell=True'. This is dangerous because this call will spawn the command using a shell process. Doing so propagates current shell settings and variables, which makes it much easier for a malicious actor to execute commands. Use 'shell=False' instead. [confidence medium]	python/mini_claude/tools.py:430
high	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.detect-child-process`: Detected calls to child_process from a function argument `input`. This could lead to a command injection if the input is user controllable. Try to avoid calls to child_process, and if it is needed ensure user input is correctly sanitized or sandboxed. [confidence low]	src/tools.ts:500
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit`: Detected subprocess function 'Popen' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low]	steps/canonical/py/mcp_client.py:15
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dangerous-subprocess-use-audit`: Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'. [confidence low]	steps/canonical/py/tools.py:209
high	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.subprocess-shell-true`: Found 'subprocess' function 'run' with 'shell=True'. This is dangerous because this call will spawn the command using a shell process. Doing so propagates current shell settings and variables, which makes it much easier for a malicious actor to execute commands. Use 'shell=False' instead. [confidence medium]	steps/canonical/py/tools.py:209
high	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.detect-child-process`: Detected calls to child_process from a function argument `command`. This could lead to a command injection if the input is user controllable. Try to avoid calls to child_process, and if it is needed ensure user input is correctly sanitized or sandboxed. [confidence low]	steps/canonical/ts/mcp.ts:14
high	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.detect-child-process`: Detected calls to child_process from a function argument `input`. This could lead to a command injection if the input is user controllable. Try to avoid calls to child_process, and if it is needed ensure user input is correctly sanitized or sandboxed. [confidence low]	steps/canonical/ts/tools.ts:209
high	`osv/GHSA-3jxr-9vmj-r5cp`: brace-expansion@5.0.5 (npm) is affected by GHSA-3jxr-9vmj-r5cp	package-lock.json
high	`osv/GHSA-6j4f-fj2g-mc7p`: brace-expansion@5.0.5 (npm) is affected by GHSA-6j4f-fj2g-mc7p	package-lock.json
high	`osv/GHSA-mh99-v99m-4gvg`: brace-expansion@5.0.5 (npm) is affected by GHSA-mh99-v99m-4gvg	package-lock.json
high	`osv/GHSA-qhr7-859c-m2p7`: brace-expansion@5.0.5 (npm) is affected by GHSA-qhr7-859c-m2p7	package-lock.json
high	`osv/GHSA-rgw5-rvv9-x895`: brace-expansion@5.0.5 (npm) is affected by GHSA-rgw5-rvv9-x895	package-lock.json
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.security.audit.dynamic-urllib-use-detected`: Detected a dynamic value being used with urllib. urllib supports 'file://' schemes, so a dynamic value controlled by a malicious actor may allow them to read arbitrary files. Audit uses of urllib calls to ensure user data cannot control the URLs, or consider using the 'requests' library instead. [confidence low]	python/mini_claude/tools.py:460
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal`: Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low]	src/agent.ts:1324
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename`: Detected that function argument `toolName` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low]	src/agent.ts:1325
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.html-in-template-string`: This template literal looks like HTML and has interpolated variables. These variables are not HTML-encoded by default. If the variables contain HTML tags, these may be interpreted by the browser, resulting in cross-site scripting (XSS). [confidence low]	src/autonomy.ts:461
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename`: Detected that function argument `filePath` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low]	src/mcp.ts:260
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename`: Detected that function argument `filePath` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low]	src/mcp.ts:262
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename`: Detected that function argument `a` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low]	src/memory.ts:83
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.path-traversal.path-join-resolve-traversal`: Detected possible user input going into a `path.join` or `path.resolve` function. This could possibly lead to a path traversal vulnerability, where the attacker can access arbitrary files stored in the file system. Instead, be sure to sanitize or validate user input first. [confidence low]	src/memory.ts:83
medium	`opengrep/javascript.lang.security.audit.detect-non-literal-fs-filename`: Detected that function argument `b` has entered the fs module. An attacker could potentially control the location of this file, to include going backwards in the directory with '../'. To address this, ensure that user-controlled variables in file paths are validated. [confidence low]	src/memory.ts:84

Static signals only: the scorer never runs the project's code. Secret findings are pattern matches that were not verified, and secret values are never stored.

Repository profile

Source lines: 13,707; test lines: 1,970

Language	Lines
Python	6,649
TypeScript	6,498
JavaScript	2,421
Shell	109

AI provenance

Code quality

Security

Scores

AI provenance

Evidence

Code quality

Security

Top findings

Repository profile

Embed a badge