nicegui-template · Nerlo

AI review of these findings

Findings in files this artifact installs stand as reported; a model re-read the rest and said which ones it believes are false positives. This is a second opinion published beside the evidence, not a correction to it: the per-scanner reports above are unchanged, every dismissed finding is still listed there at its original severity, and the score and the Flagged badge are computed from those raw severities alone. Nothing below moved them.

Upheld as real: 158
Dismissed as false positives: 2
Not reviewed: 68

Out of 228 findings across every scanner that examined this package. None of the 2 findings rated critical by their scanner were dismissed.

Not reviewed is not the same as clean. Those 68 findings stand exactly as their scanners reported them, at full severity, as they would have without this review.

Why those were dismissed

Two keys had to turn. The model had to name a reason from a fixed list of six, and a deterministic check of ours — over which files this artifact actually installs — had to independently agree. Anything it could not corroborate is in “not reviewed” above, at full severity.

1 Agent instruction file — The match is in a file that instructs an AI coding agent — a CLAUDE.md or similar. It is documentation of intent, and our own check confirmed it is not part of what gets installed.
Rules: AAK-AGENT-002 · Files: AGENTS.md · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 CI or editor configuration — The match is in build, CI or editor configuration, confirmed by our own check to be outside the installed artifact.
Rules: AAK-GHA-IMMUTABLE-001 · Files: .github/workflows/test.yml · reported by agent-audit-kit

Upheld — the review declined to dismiss these

The model could have called any of these a false positive and did not.

2 GHSA-537c-gmf6-5ccf
Files: uv.lock, /repo/uv.lock · reported by trivy, osv-scanner
1 CVE-2024-23342
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-55201
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66034
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66418
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66470
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66471
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy

Not reviewed

68 The review budget for this scan was already spent before these findings were reached.
Rules: FILE_MAGIC_MISMATCH, PYSEC-2026-2094, CVE-2025-55214 and 62 more · Files: /repo/CLAUDE.md, /repo/uv.lock, uv.lock and 3 more · reported by cisco-skill-scanner, osv-scanner, trivy

What the review concluded

Critical vulnerabilities in artifact dependencies

The artifact includes dependencies with critical and high severity vulnerabilities. These issues, such as PYSEC-2026-36 and PYSEC-2026-2102, could allow for remote code execution, leading to unauthorized network egress, file system manipulation, or credential access. These findings are present in the dependency lock file, `/repo/uv.lock`, and require immediate attention.

Concern level assessed by the review: Critical. This is the review's scale, not the registry badge.

What to look at

PYSEC-2026-2102 · /repo/uv.lock · critical · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-36 · /repo/uv.lock · critical · reported by osv-scanner
GHSA-537c-gmf6-5ccf · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-107 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1101 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1271 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1272 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1325 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-141 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
· · high · reported by osv-scanner

Reviewed by gemini-2.5-flash. The model sees the findings, not your code, and cannot change a score.

Scan history

1 scan on record. Every scan's full results are retained immutably for 24 months.

Completed	Composite	Change	Scanners	Status
Aug 20, 2026	Flagged48	—	agentshield ·n/a: not applicablecisco-skill-scanner: completeagent-audit-kit: completenerlo-behavioral: completenerlo-install-instruction: completecapslock ·n/a: not applicablenerlo-multi-source ·n/a: not applicabletrivy: completeosv-scanner: completetrivy_image ·n/a: not applicablegovulncheck ·n/a: not applicable	completed

Per-scanner history:

AI review of these findings

Upheld as real: 158
Dismissed as false positives: 2
Not reviewed: 68

Out of 228 findings across every scanner that examined this package. None of the 2 findings rated critical by their scanner were dismissed.

Not reviewed is not the same as clean. Those 68 findings stand exactly as their scanners reported them, at full severity, as they would have without this review.

Why those were dismissed

1 Agent instruction file — The match is in a file that instructs an AI coding agent — a CLAUDE.md or similar. It is documentation of intent, and our own check confirmed it is not part of what gets installed.
Rules: AAK-AGENT-002 · Files: AGENTS.md · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 CI or editor configuration — The match is in build, CI or editor configuration, confirmed by our own check to be outside the installed artifact.
Rules: AAK-GHA-IMMUTABLE-001 · Files: .github/workflows/test.yml · reported by agent-audit-kit

Upheld — the review declined to dismiss these

The model could have called any of these a false positive and did not.

2 GHSA-537c-gmf6-5ccf
Files: uv.lock, /repo/uv.lock · reported by trivy, osv-scanner
1 CVE-2024-23342
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-55201
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66034
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66418
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66470
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy
1 CVE-2025-66471
Files: uv.lock · reported by trivy

Not reviewed

68 The review budget for this scan was already spent before these findings were reached.
Rules: FILE_MAGIC_MISMATCH, PYSEC-2026-2094, CVE-2025-55214 and 62 more · Files: /repo/CLAUDE.md, /repo/uv.lock, uv.lock and 3 more · reported by cisco-skill-scanner, osv-scanner, trivy

What the review concluded

Critical vulnerabilities in artifact dependencies

Concern level assessed by the review: Critical. This is the review's scale, not the registry badge.

What to look at

PYSEC-2026-2102 · /repo/uv.lock · critical · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-36 · /repo/uv.lock · critical · reported by osv-scanner
GHSA-537c-gmf6-5ccf · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-107 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1101 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1271 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1272 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-1325 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
PYSEC-2026-141 · /repo/uv.lock · high · reported by osv-scanner
· · high · reported by osv-scanner

Reviewed by gemini-2.5-flash. The model sees the findings, not your code, and cannot change a score.

nicegui-template

Install

Per-scanner reports

Scanners that examined this package (6)

cisco-skill-scanner

agent-audit-kit

nerlo-skill-scanner (behavioral)

nerlo-skill-scanner (install-doc)

trivy

osv-scanner

Scanners that did not run on this package (5)

agentshield

capslock

nerlo-multi-source

trivy (image)

govulncheck

AI review of these findings

Why those were dismissed

Upheld — the review declined to dismiss these

Not reviewed

What the review concluded

What to look at

Scan history

AI review of these findings

Why those were dismissed

Upheld — the review declined to dismiss these

Not reviewed

What the review concluded

What to look at

Install

Per-scanner reports

Scanners that examined this package (6)

cisco-skill-scanner

agent-audit-kit

nerlo-skill-scanner (behavioral)

nerlo-skill-scanner (install-doc)

trivy

osv-scanner

Scanners that did not run on this package (5)

agentshield

capslock

nerlo-multi-source

trivy (image)

govulncheck

Composite scoreOne view among many — the per-scanner reports above are primaryFlagged48

AI review of these findings

Why those were dismissed

Upheld — the review declined to dismiss these

Not reviewed

What the review concluded

What to look at

Scan history

AI review of these findings

Why those were dismissed

Upheld — the review declined to dismiss these

Not reviewed

What the review concluded

What to look at