There are two issues with `deepcopy` here. Firstly, the `deepcopy` function itself
has a mutable default value in its parameter `_nil` (set to the empty list by default).
Now, this value is never actually returned from `deepcopy`, as it is only used as a
sentinel, but our analysis is not clever enough to see this. Thus, it thinks that this
mutable default is returned, and hence the result of any call to `deepcopy` is a
potential source.
To remedy this, I opted to simply exclude all sources that originate from within the
standard library. It is very unlikely for any of the sources in the standard library
to be legit.
Secondly, `deepcopy` -- by virtue of being a function that we model as preserving
values -- admits data-flow through its calls, but this is not correct for the mutable
default query, as it is here the _identity_ of the default value in question that is
important. Thus, we get spurious flow through `deepcopy` for this specific query.
