Score breakdown
Popularity is tracked separately. Support, ads, sponsorships, and tips never affect these signals.
Why it matters
Useful for developers and security-minded teams that want a local-first guardrail around coding assistants, especially when cloud secret scanners are disallowed or politically dead on arrival.
Who should use it
Who should skip it
Skip acunningham-ship-it/leakproof if the source link, documentation, or setup requirements do not align with your current workflow or stack.
About this signal
acunningham-ship-it/leakproof is tracked by RepoRadar as a ai security in the Developer Tools section. It was first seen on 2026-06-30 and last updated on 2026-06-30. The current verdict is 'worth watch' with a Silver tier and moderate setup difficulty. The standout signals for acunningham-ship-it/leakproof are workflow potential (8.6) and open-source/build quality (8.4), while momentum (3.0) trails — that balance shapes where it fits best. This page summarizes the evidence RepoRadar has captured from captured source metadata. The score, tier, risk label, and verdict on this page are never influenced by sponsorship, ads, or tips — they reflect only the usefulness, popularity, novelty, momentum, maturity, and evidence signals described in the RepoRadar methodology.
How this item is evaluated
RepoRadar assigned acunningham-ship-it/leakproof a composite score of 7.8 out of 10, placing it in the Silver tier. This score combines weighted sub-signals: usefulness (35%), novelty (18%), momentum (14%), maturity (10%), open-source/build quality (7%), evidence quality (6%), workflow potential (6%), and setup ease (4%). Popularity is tracked separately at 1.0 and never affects the composite score or tier. The risk label of 'none' reflects inherent user-impacting hazards, not generic novelty. Items with no risk flag may still require normal code review before production use.
Putting this into practice? Read How to evaluate an AI tool before you adopt it for the checklist behind this score.
Risk explanation
It is a protective layer, not a perfect guarantee, so validate both false negatives and false positives against your own repos before treating it as a primary secret-control boundary; Because it sits inline on outbound assistant traffic, test how it affects tool reliability and prompt formatting before rolling it out across a whole team.