@aptos-scp/isl-types-integration
Type definitions and schemas for Integration Service Layer (ISL)
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
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Type-definitions package from established org; no provenance is common and not a risk here. | ai | |
| email-domain | unclaimed-email:y.com | AI (email-domain): [email protected] is a placeholder email; package is an established type-definitions library with 44 versions and a legitimate org repo. | ai |
Versions (showing 45 of 45)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.33.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.32.1 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.31.2 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.31.1 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.31.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.30.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.29.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.28.1 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.28.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.27.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.26.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.25.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.24.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.23.1 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.23.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.22.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.21.1 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.20.2 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.20.1 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.20.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.19.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.18.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.17.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.16.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.15.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.14.0 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.13.3 | 0 / 44 | |
| 1.13.2 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.13.1 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.11.1 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.11.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.10.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.9.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.8.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.7.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.6.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.5.1 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.5.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.4.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.3.1 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.3.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.2.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.1.0 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.0.1 | 0 / 43 | |
| 1.0.0 | 0 / 43 |
v1.33.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.32.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.31.2
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.31.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.31.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.30.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.29.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.28.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.28.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.27.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.26.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.25.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.24.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.23.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.23.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.22.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.21.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.20.2
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.20.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.20.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.19.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.18.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.17.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.16.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.15.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.14.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.13.3
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.13.2
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.13.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.11.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.11.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.10.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.9.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.8.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.7.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.6.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.5.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.5.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.4.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.3.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.3.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.2.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.1.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.1
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.0
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'y.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.