gitsafehub
github.com/jeromegamez/codeigniter4 ↗

jeromegamez/codeigniter4

scanned 2026-08-09 · git 3d1603e
1 of 6 checks flagged a security issue
🟡 Worth a look
Only 4 of 6 checks finished — treat this as provisional. Re-check ↻

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

Leaked secrets—Vulnerable dependencies✓Known OSS vulnerabilities11Risky code patterns✓Malicious dependencies✓Project health—

Security checks

Leaked secrets — Gitleaksⓘ timed out

API keys, passwords or tokens committed into the repo.

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

via Gitleaks v8.21.2 · MIT

error: timeout after 120s

Vulnerable dependencies — Trivyⓘ none found ✓

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

Nothing found by this check. ✓

via Trivy v0.70.0 · Apache-2.0

Known OSS vulnerabilities — OSV-Scannerⓘ 11 found

Your dependencies cross-checked against the OSV vulnerability database.

  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2023-117 A ReDoS issue was discovered in pygments/lexers/smithy.py in pygments through 2.15.0 via SmithyLexer.
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2022-40896). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2018-28 The Requests package before 2.20.0 for Python sends an HTTP Authorization header to an http URI upon receiving a same-hostname https-to-http redirect, which makes it easier for remote attackers to dis
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2018-18074). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2023-74 Requests is a HTTP library. Since Requests 2.3.0, Requests has been leaking Proxy-Authorization headers to destination servers when redirected to an HTTPS endpoint. This is a product of how we use `re
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2023-32681). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2026-1872 Requests vulnerable to .netrc credentials leak via malicious URLs
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2024-47081). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2026-1873 Requests `Session` object does not verify requests after making first request with verify=False
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2024-35195). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2026-2275 Requests is a HTTP library. Prior to version 2.33.0, the `requests.utils.extract_zipped_paths()` utility function uses a predictable filename when extracting files from zip archives into the system te
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2026-25645). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2022-43012 Python Packaging Authority (PyPA) setuptools before 65.5.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via HTML in a crafted package or custom PackageIndex page. There is a Regular Expression
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2022-40897). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2025-49 setuptools is a package that allows users to download, build, install, upgrade, and uninstall Python packages. A path traversal vulnerability in `PackageIndex` is present in setuptools prior to versio
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2025-47273). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2026-1918 setuptools vulnerable to Command Injection via package URL
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2024-6345). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Worth fixing PYSEC-2026-3447 setuptools is a package that allows users to download, build, install, upgrade, and uninstall Python packages. Prior to 83.0.0, FileList applied MANIFEST.in exclude, global-exclude, recursive-exclude,
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2026-59890). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
  • Minor PYSEC-2026-2987 Pygments has Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) due to Inefficient Regex for GUID Matching
    /workdirs/scan-73889cec-c9d7-48a4-bf94-e8a42b548243/user_guide_src/requirements.txt
    A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2026-4539). 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.