gitsafehub
github.com/foostan/capistrano-consul ↗

foostan/capistrano-consul

scanned 2026-08-13 · git 63525c3
3 of 6 checks flagged a security issue
🟡 Worth a look
Only 5 of 6 checks finished — treat this as provisional. Re-check ↻

Informational scan, not a security audit. How this is computed.

Leaked secrets4Vulnerable dependencies2Known OSS vulnerabilities2Risky code patternsMalicious dependenciesProject health

Security checks

Leaked secrets — Gitleaks 4 found

API keys, passwords or tokens committed into the repo.

  • Worth fixing generic-api-key Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
    .consul/ui/static/application.min.js:121
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Worth fixing generic-api-key Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
    .consul/ui/static/application.min.js:124
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Worth fixing generic-api-key Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
    .consul/ui/static/application.min.js:129
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Worth fixing generic-api-key Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
    .consul/ui/static/application.min.js:130
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.

via Gitleaks v8.21.2 · MIT

Vulnerable dependencies — Trivy 2 found

Packages you depend on that have known security holes (CVEs).

  • Worth fixing CVE-2014-10077 rubygem-i18n: denial of service in Hash#slice in lib/i18n/core_ext/hash.rb
    Gemfile.lock
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2014-10077). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing CVE-2020-8130 rake: OS Command Injection via egrep in Rake::FileList
    Gemfile.lock
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2020-8130). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.

via Trivy v0.70.0 · Apache-2.0

Known OSS vulnerabilities — OSV-Scanner 2 found

Your dependencies cross-checked against the OSV vulnerability database.

  • Worth fixing GHSA-34hf-g744-jw64 i18n Vulnerable to Denial of Service Attack
    /workdirs/scan-e5c0c003-7ebc-4ba1-b843-8c4444445492/Gemfile.lock
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2014-10077). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing GHSA-jppv-gw3r-w3q8 OS Command Injection in Rake
    /workdirs/scan-e5c0c003-7ebc-4ba1-b843-8c4444445492/Gemfile.lock
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2020-8130). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.

via OSV-Scanner v1.9.2 · Apache-2.0

Risky code patterns — Semgrep none found ✓

Code that can be exploited: injection, hardcoded credentials and similar.

Nothing found by this check. ✓

via Semgrep v1.147.0 · LGPL-2.1

Malicious dependencies — Guarddog none found ✓

Packages that look intentionally malicious: typosquats, sneaky install scripts.

Nothing found by this check. ✓

via Guarddog v2.10.0 · Apache-2.0

Project health

A signal about how the project is maintained — not a vulnerability in your code. It doesn’t affect the verdict above.

Project health — OpenSSF Scorecard didn’t run

Maintenance & supply-chain hygiene. A signal about the project, not a vulnerability in your code.

This check didn’t finish — that’s not the same as “clean.” Try Check again above.

via OpenSSF Scorecard · Apache-2.0

About these results. Six open-source checks ran in parallel; every finding is tagged with the tool that produced it. The verdict follows a published rule. False positives and false negatives are normal — a clean scan does not mean the code is secure, and a red verdict does not mean the project is compromised.