@amazebird/mobile-schema-form
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Without SLSA provenance there is no cryptographic link between this tarball and the public source — the axios compromise (March 2026) relied on exactly this gap.
Maintainers
Keywords
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| npm-metadata | no-description | AI (npm-metadata): Org-scoped package with consistent versioning history; missing description is cosmetic. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): No provenance is common for this publisher's packages; not a risk indicator here. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:rc-field-form | AI (phantom-deps): rc-field-form is listed as a runtime dependency in package.json; phantom-dep is a false positive. | ai |
Versions (showing 5 of 5)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 4.3.1 | 8 / 0 | |
| 4.0.2 | 8 / 0 | |
| 4.0.1 | 8 / 0 | |
| 3.7.0 | 8 / 0 | |
| 3.6.19 | 8 / 0 |
v4.3.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v4.0.2
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.0.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v3.7.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v3.6.19
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.