OpenDriveLab/UniAD

scanned 2026-07-24 · git 609ee08

2 of 6 checks flagged a security issue

🔴 Needs attention

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 dependencies4Known OSS vulnerabilities—Risky code patterns✓Malicious dependencies5Project health—

Security checks

Leaked secrets — Gitleaksⓘ none found ✓

API keys, passwords or tokens committed into the repo.

Nothing found by this check. ✓

via Gitleaks v8.21.2 · MIT

Vulnerable dependencies — Trivyⓘ 4 found · 2 serious

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

Serious CVE-2022-0845 Code Injection in PyTorch Lightning

requirements.txt

A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2022-0845). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
Serious CVE-2024-8019 PyTorch Lightning path traversal vulnerability

requirements.txt

A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2024-8019). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
Worth fixing GHSA-qr4w-53vh-m672 opencv-python bundled libwebp binaries in wheels that are vulnerable to CVE-2023-4863

requirements.txt

A package you depend on has a known security hole (GHSA-qr4w-53vh-m672). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.
Worth fixing CVE-2021-4118 pytorch-lightning is vulnerable to Deserialization of Untrusted Data

requirements.txt

A package you depend on has a known security hole (CVE-2021-4118). Fix: Update that package to its patched version.

via Trivy v0.70.0 · Apache-2.0

Known OSS vulnerabilities — OSV-Scannerⓘ timed out

Your dependencies cross-checked against the OSV vulnerability database.

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

via OSV-Scanner v1.9.2 · Apache-2.0

error: timeout after 400s

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ⓘ 5 found · 2 serious

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

Serious guarddog-pypi-code-execution code-execution match in numpy 1.22.4

numpy

A dependency shows signs of being intentionally malicious (typosquat, hidden install script, etc.). Fix: Don’t install it until you’ve verified the package. Consider removing it.
Serious guarddog-pypi-code-execution code-execution match in pandas 1.2.2

pandas

A dependency shows signs of being intentionally malicious (typosquat, hidden install script, etc.). Fix: Don’t install it until you’ve verified the package. Consider removing it.
Worth fixing guarddog-pypi-shady-links shady-links match in pytorch-lightning 1.2.5

pytorch-lightning

A dependency shows signs of being intentionally malicious (typosquat, hidden install script, etc.). Fix: Don’t install it until you’ve verified the package. Consider removing it.
Worth fixing guarddog-pypi-obfuscation obfuscation match in ipython 8.12.3

ipython

A dependency shows signs of being intentionally malicious (typosquat, hidden install script, etc.). Fix: Don’t install it until you’ve verified the package. Consider removing it.
Worth fixing guarddog-pypi-obfuscation obfuscation match in numpy 1.22.4

numpy

A dependency shows signs of being intentionally malicious (typosquat, hidden install script, etc.). Fix: Don’t install it until you’ve verified the package. Consider removing it.

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.