github.com/soulmachine/leetcode ↗
soulmachine/leetcode
scanned 2026-06-30 · git a12593e
No security issues flagged
🟢 Looks clean so far
Only 5 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 vulnerabilities✓⚠️Risky code patterns✓☠️Malicious dependencies✓🩺Project 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ⓘ
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ⓘ
none found ✓
Your dependencies cross-checked against the OSV vulnerability database.
Nothing found by this check. ✓
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.