golf.dev ↗ · required email domain for this vendor's users
Trust profileHow to read thisFive separate questions a buyer actually asks, each answered with its own evidence and a link to the source. There is deliberately no overall score: a single number invites comparison it cannot support, and would mostly reflect how much of Golf we have managed to scan rather than anything about the vendor.
Not checked means we have not looked yet, and is never counted against a vendor. Limited means we did look, but found only one line of evidence — enough to report, not enough to corroborate.
checked 7 of 16 signals
Limited
Independently verified
Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?
checked 3 of 4
Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.
No third-party certifications found
Profile not claimed by the vendor
Limited
Operating durability
Is this a real, durable business?
checked 2 of 4
How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.
Headquarters location not disclosed on their site
Mixed
Behaviour under stress
What do they do when something goes wrong?
checked 2 of 3
What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.
6 published CVE(s) — a public disclosure record exists
1 rated critical
No public status page found
Not checked
Disclosure posture
Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?
checked 0 of 3
We have not checked what this vendor discloses publicly yet.
Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against Golf.
Not checked
Momentum
Are they still shipping, or coasting?
checked 0 of 2
We have not tracked this vendor's release activity yet.
Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against Golf.
Data coverage: 10/100What this measures (and doesn't)
Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.
The platform admin controls the formula's weights.
Data coverage profileHow to read thisThe same four components behind the data coverage score above, shaped instead of listed — a vendor strong on verification but thin on buyer feedback looks visibly different from one that's the other way around. Security and feedback plot at the neutral midpoint (50) when there's no data yet (no products tracked, no reviews), matching how the actual score itself treats missing data — not a guess either way.
Buyer reviewsUI-14 — verified-buyer reviewsWritten only by domain-verified buyers at other companies, attributed to their company domain (never their identity), and moderated. Buyer-sourced opinion, clearly separate from the neutral catalog facts above — and never an input to search or comparison ordering.
verified buyers only
No buyer reviews yet.
Reputation ratingUI-20 — anonymous ratingA single anonymous 5-star signal from buyers, resellers, and analysts who've engaged with this vendor — separate from the domain-attributed reviews above. No rater identity is ever shown, not even at company level.
anonymous
No ratings in this window yet.
MCP control plane for AI agent governance, audit, and policy enforcement. AI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →
Security & trust signalsAbout these signalsCertifications are keyword-matched from the vendor's own public pages (each claim links to its source — verify directly before relying on it). Security headers are checked live against the vendor's homepage, re-checked every 90 days. Both are independent, automated signals, not a vendor-submitted or audited claim, and are not blended into a single score.
1 of 9 technical checks completed — not a score, just coverage
No positive signals detected yet across the checks completed so far.
CVE severity over timeUI-24 — CVE severity timelineEvery known CVE with a disclosure date and severity, plotted by when it was published — lets you see whether disclosures are trending toward more or less severe, not just a raw count. Same NVD-sourced, name-matched data as the list below.
Known CVEs (6)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. This is a name-based match, not exact version tracking — always check the linked NVD record for affected versions before drawing conclusions. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score.
Improper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion') vulnerability in ThemeREX N7 | Golf Club Sports & Events n7-golf-club allows PHP Local File Incl…
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') vulnerability in percent20 Golf Tracker golf-tracker allows SQL Injection.This issue affects Golf Tracker: from n/a…
Deserialization of Untrusted Data vulnerability in GMRobbins Disc Golf Manager disc-golf-manager allows Object Injection.This issue affects Disc Golf Manager: from n/a through <= 1.0.0.
The iGolf - Golf GPS (aka com.igolf) application 20 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive info…
The Super Stickman Golf (aka com.noodlecake.ssg) application 2.2 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain s…
SQL injection vulnerability in the Golf Course Guide (com_golfcourseguide) component 0.9.6.0 beta and 1 beta for Joomla! allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the id parameter …
Golf GovernanceAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
MCP control plane for AI agent governance, audit, and policy enforcement.
Golf MCP Control PlaneAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
Governance & visibility platform for MCP servers and AI agent connections.
