legalrealist/mike_hard
A fork that wraps Mike in a security-hardened label and an audit report - but hasn't shipped the fixes yet.
This is legalrealist's security-minded take on Mike, pitched to legal-tech readers who care about what's running under the hood. The fork presents itself as 'hardened' and ships an accompanying audit write-up, so the framing is clear: this is meant to be the safety-conscious version of Mike for practitioners handling sensitive matter.
The catch is that the branding is currently ahead of the substance. legalrealist stamps the project as hardened and then, almost in the same breath, concedes that none of the identified issues have actually been addressed yet. So what you'll encounter today is the posture of a security review - the labeling, the audit narrative - rather than a codebase that's been measurably tightened.
That's not nothing. An honest 'here's what's wrong, fixes pending' audit can be a useful starting point, and the direction is legible: take Mike, scrutinize it, and harden it for legal work. Whether legalrealist follows through on the fixes is the open question. If you want to see the audit for yourself, the GitHub repo is where to look.
What's in it
- Hardened branding The fork positions itself as the security-conscious build of Mike, aimed at readers who weigh trustworthiness alongside features.
- Audit report Ships an accompanying security write-up cataloguing concerns - useful as a map of what legalrealist thinks needs attention.
- Fixes still pending legalrealist openly concedes the identified issues haven't been resolved yet, so the 'hardened' label is aspirational for now.
Direction
securitybranding
Activity
Threads of work (detailed view)
legalrealist stamps Mike 'hardened' - then admits nothing's actually fixed
A fork that brands itself security-hardened concedes, one commit later, that not a single fix has been applied.