gitsafehub
github.com/tanishq-dubey/docs ↗

tanishq-dubey/docs

scanned 2026-08-06 · git 87436c4
1 of 6 checks flagged a security issue
🔴 Needs attention
Only 5 of 6 checks finished — treat this as provisional. Re-check ↻

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

Leaked secrets7Vulnerable dependencies✓Known OSS vulnerabilities✓Risky code patterns✓Malicious dependencies✓Project health—

Security checks

Leaked secrets — Gitleaksⓘ 7 found · 6 serious

API keys, passwords or tokens committed into the repo.

  • Serious curl-auth-user Discovered a potential basic authorization token provided in a curl command, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
    setup/protocols/http/README.md:51
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Serious curl-auth-header Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
    usage/filtering-logs.md:28
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Serious curl-auth-header Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
    usage/filtering-logs.md:52
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Serious curl-auth-header Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
    usage/filtering-logs.md:66
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Serious curl-auth-header Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
    usage/filtering-logs.md:82
    A credential (key, password or token) appears in your code. Fix: Remove it, rotate the key, and load it from an environment variable instead.
  • Serious curl-auth-header Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
    setup/protocols/http/README.md:30
    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.
    setup/protocols/http/README.md:87
    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ⓘ 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.