MalDet

Scan report

itamae-kitchen / mitamae

Report Rescan
Vulnerability Medium

Could an attacker exploit mistakes in this code?

33 risk score

Real issues worth reviewing before you rely on this code.

High
0
Medium
18
Low
0

Sources: Bandit, Semgrep, pip-audit

Malicious pattern Safe

Does this code look like it is trying to cause harm?

0 risk score

No issues of this kind were found.

High
0
Medium
0
Low
1

Sources: YARA, ClamAV, GuardDog, dependency checker

Findings overview
19 total findings
Likely real
18
Uncertain
0
Likely noise
1

The risk classifier rates every finding for how likely it is to be a real issue. Likely noise still counts, just much less.

What we found, in plain English

This repository has a medium vulnerability score of 33, which means there are some insecure coding patterns that an attacker could exploit if they gain access to the code. However, the scan found no signs of malicious intent or hidden malware, so the code is not actively dangerous on its own. The main issues are standard mistakes like using non-static commands in IO.popen and system, which can be exploited if user data isn't properly validated before running them. There are also some configuration gaps, such as missing a cooldown period for Dependabot updates and the use of mutable GitHub Actions tags that could theoretically lead to supply-chain attacks. While these findings look like ordinary insecure coding rather than malicious intent, they do not make the code safe to use without further review and fixes.

Written by a local language model from the findings below. The risk scores come from the classifier, not from this summary.

Detections by engine

  • Semgrep 18

    Pattern-based code analysis · Vulnerability

  • YARA 1

    Malware signature rules · Malicious pattern

Score over time

Overall score each time this repository was scanned.

Findings

Highest severity first. Select a finding to see the code and what it means.