@devvit/ui-renderer
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:rxjs | AI (phantom-deps): rxjs is declared in dependencies and used at runtime; phantom-dep heuristic is a false positive for this package. | ai | |
| npm-metadata | no-description | AI (npm-metadata): Monorepo internal package; missing description is stable pattern. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance; not a disqualifier for established packages. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:nice-grpc-web | AI (dependencies): Well-known gRPC-web client library; no known malicious history. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@devvit/runtime-lite | AI (dependencies): First-party @devvit sibling package; stable pattern across all versions. | ai | |
| bogus-package | bogus-package | AI (bogus-package): Internal Reddit platform package; sparse README/metadata is expected for internal tooling. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@devvit/shared-types | AI (dependencies): First-party @devvit sibling package; stable pattern across all versions. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@devvit/multiplatform | AI (dependencies): First-party @devvit sibling package; stable pattern across all versions. | ai |
Versions (showing 17 of 17)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 0.12.24 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.23 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.22 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.21 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.19 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.18 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.17 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.15 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.10 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.7 | 7 / 35 | |
| 0.12.4 | 7 / 32 | |
| 0.12.3 | 7 / 32 | |
| 0.12.2 | 7 / 32 | |
| 0.12.0 | 7 / 32 | |
| 0.11.17 | 8 / 35 | |
| 0.11.15 | 8 / 35 | |
| 0.11.14 | 8 / 35 |
v0.12.24
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.12.23
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.12.22
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.12.19
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.18
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.17
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.15
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.10
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.12.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.11.17
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.11.15
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.11.14
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.