Score breakdown
Popularity is tracked separately. Support, ads, sponsorships, and tips never affect these signals.
Why it matters
Useful for AI red teams validating reasoning-leak mitigations, API providers reasoning about CoT exposure and encryption boundaries, and researchers benchmarking proprietary-reasoning trace protection.
Who should use it
Who should skip it
Avoid running mitkox/stolen-thoughts in production until you have reviewed its permissions, data-access scope, and failure modes in a sandbox.
About this signal
mitkox/stolen-thoughts is tracked by RepoRadar as a research project in the Reasoning Trace Security section. First seen 2026-08-12; the source record was last checked on 2026-08-12. The current verdict is 'research only' with a Silver tier and moderate setup difficulty. mitkox/stolen-thoughts leads on novelty (10.0) and workflow potential (9.2); its lowest signal is maturity (6.3), so factor that in before investing setup time. This page summarizes the public evidence on the linked source page and states where additional review is still needed.
How this item is evaluated
The mitkox/stolen-thoughts record combines a 8.8/10 composite score with separate popularity (0.2), risk (medium), and setup (moderate) signals. See the scoring methodology for the current weights and evidence definitions.
Putting this into practice? Read How to read AI benchmarks without getting fooled for the checklist behind this score.
Risk explanation
It is a documented attack surface against proprietary reasoning APIs; use only in controlled red-team environments with the provider's prior authorization, never against production APIs you do not own; It is research-grade code that documents an attack; downstream users must add their own guardrails before reusing the implementation in any customer-facing context.