RRepoGEO

REPOGEO REPORT · LITE

SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC

Default branch main · commit e13a3c4d · scanned 6/4/2026, 5:07:45 PM

GitHub: 903 stars · 208 forks

AI VISIBILITY SCORE
23 /100
Critical
Category recall
0 / 2
Not recommended in any query
Rule findings
1 pass · 0 warn · 1 fail
Objective metadata checks
AI knows your name
2 / 3
Direct prompts that named your repo
HOW TO READ THIS REPORT

Action plan is what to do next — copy-pasteable changes prioritized by impact. Category visibility is the real GEO test: when a user asks an AI a brand-free question that should surface SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC, does the AI actually recommend you — or your competitors? Objective checks verify the metadata signals AI engines weight first. Self-mention check detects whether AI even knows you exist by name.

Action plan — copy-paste fixes

2 prioritized changes generated by gemini-2.5-flash. Mark items done after you ship the fix.

OVERALL DIRECTION
  • highlicense#1
    Add a LICENSE file and mention it in the README

    Why:

    COPY-PASTE FIX
    Create a `LICENSE` file (e.g., `LICENSE.md` with the MIT License text) in the repository root. Then, add a line to the README under the '⚖️ 免责声明 (Disclaimer)' section, such as: '本项目采用 MIT 许可协议。'
  • mediumreadme#2
    Strengthen the README's opening sentence for clearer AI categorization

    Why:

    CURRENT
    > 🚀 **实战导向，沉淀攻防。** 本项目主要记录在**红蓝对抗、渗透测试、安全研究**实战中接触到的 1day/N-day 漏洞。通过深度的复现归档与利用分析，沉淀一线攻防经验，助力安全从业者快速掌握漏洞情报。
    COPY-PASTE FIX
    > 🚀 **实战导向，沉淀攻防。** 本项目是一个**实战型 1Day/N-day 漏洞 PoC 深度研究与复现归档**，主要记录在**红蓝对抗、渗透测试、安全研究**中接触到的高价值漏洞。通过深度的复现归档与利用分析，沉淀一线攻防经验，助力安全从业者快速掌握漏洞情报。

Category GEO backends resolved for this scan: google/gemini-2.5-flash, deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash

Category visibility — the real GEO test

Brand-free queries asked to google/gemini-2.5-flash. Did AI recommend you, or someone else?

Same questions for every model — switch tabs to compare answers and rankings.

Recall
0 / 2
0% of queries surface SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC
Avg rank
—
Lower is better. #1 = top recommendation.
Share of voice
0%
Of all named tools, what % are you?
Top rival
GitHub
Recommended in 2 of 2 queries
COMPETITOR LEADERBOARD
  1. GitHub · recommended 2×
  2. Exploit-DB · recommended 2×
  3. Packet Storm Security · recommended 2×
  4. Metasploit Framework · recommended 2×
  5. Project Zero · recommended 1×
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Where can I find practical PoCs for recent vulnerabilities in enterprise systems?
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. GitHub
    2. Exploit-DB
    3. Packet Storm Security
    4. Project Zero
    5. Mandiant
    6. CrowdStrike
    7. NCC Group
    8. Pwn2Own
    9. Metasploit Framework
    10. NVD (National Vulnerability Database)
    11. CISA Advisories

    AI recommended 11 alternatives but never named SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer
  • CATEGORY QUERY
    Seeking a comprehensive archive of real-world 1-day exploits for security research.
    you: not recommended
    AI recommended (in order):
    1. Exploit-DB
    2. National Vulnerability Database
    3. Packet Storm Security
    4. GitHub
    5. 0day.today
    6. Metasploit Framework
    7. Snyk Vulnerability Database

    AI recommended 7 alternatives but never named SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC. This is the gap to close.

    Show full AI answer

Objective checks

Rule-based audits of metadata signals AI engines weight most.

  • Metadata completeness
    fail

    Suggestion:

  • README presence
    pass

Self-mention check

Does AI even know your repo exists when asked about it directly?

  • Compared to common alternatives in this category, what is the core differentiator of SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC?
    pass
    AI named SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC explicitly

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

  • If a team adopts SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC in production, what risks or prerequisites should they evaluate first?
    pass
    AI named SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC explicitly

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

  • In one sentence, what problem does the repo SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC solve, and who is the primary audience?
    pass
    AI did not name SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC — likely talking about a different project

    AI answers can be confidently wrong. Read for accuracy: does it match your actual tech stack, audience, and differentiator?

Embed your GEO score

Drop this badge into the README of SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC. It auto-updates whenever the report is rescanned and links back to the latest report — easy public proof that you care about AI discoverability.

RepoGEO badge previewLive preview
MARKDOWN (README)
[![RepoGEO](https://repogeo.com/badge/SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC.svg)](https://repogeo.com/en/r/SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC)
HTML
<a href="https://repogeo.com/en/r/SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC"><img src="https://repogeo.com/badge/SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC.svg" alt="RepoGEO" /></a>
Pro

Subscribe to Pro for deep diagnoses

SourByte05/Vulnerability-Wiki-PoC — Lite scans stay free; this card itemizes Pro deep limits vs Lite.

  • Deep reports10 / month
  • Brand-free category queries5 vs 2 in Lite
  • Prioritized action items8 vs 3 in Lite