@fastify/rate-limit
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Without SLSA provenance there is no cryptographic link between this tarball and the public source, so a manually published version cannot be tied back to a reviewed commit.
Maintainers
Keywords
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| maintainer-change | maintainer-added | AI (maintainer-change): Fastify org regularly rotates maintainers; new names are known fastify contributors. | ai | |
| maintainer-change | maintainer-removed | AI (maintainer-change): Removal of prior maintainers consistent with org-level rotation, not a takeover. | ai | |
| publish-pattern | dormant-publish | AI (publish-pattern): Long gap explained by major version bump (v10→v11); established package with active org. | ai |
Versions (showing 10 of 10)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 11.1.0 | 3 / 10 | |
| 11.0.0 | 3 / 10 | |
| 10.3.0 | 3 / 11 | |
| 10.2.2 | 3 / 11 | |
| 10.2.1 | 3 / 10 | |
| 10.2.0 | 3 / 10 | |
| 10.1.1 | 3 / 10 | |
| 10.1.0 | 3 / 10 | |
| 10.0.1 | 3 / 10 | |
| 10.0.0 | 3 / 10 |
v11.1.0
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (eomm) than the most recent previously approved version (fdawgs) on 2026-06-28, but eomm is listed as a maintainer on prior approved versions (matched on name). This looks like a manual publish by a known maintainer rather than a publisher change. Recorded as INFO for audit trail.
v10.2.2
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (fdawgs) than the most recent previously approved version (gurgunday) on 2025-01-10, but fdawgs is listed as a maintainer on prior approved versions (matched on name). This looks like a manual publish by a known maintainer rather than a publisher change. Recorded as INFO for audit trail.
v10.2.1
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v10.2.0
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (gurgunday) than the most recent previously approved version (matteo.collina) on 2024-11-15, but gurgunday is listed as a maintainer on prior approved versions (matched on name). This looks like a manual publish by a known maintainer rather than a publisher change. Recorded as INFO for audit trail.
v10.1.1
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (gurgunday) than the most recent previously approved version (matteo.collina) on 2024-10-04, but gurgunday is listed as a maintainer on prior approved versions (matched on name). This looks like a manual publish by a known maintainer rather than a publisher change. Recorded as INFO for audit trail.
v10.1.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v10.0.1
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (eomm) than the most recent previously approved version (matteo.collina) on 2024-09-21, but eomm is listed as a maintainer on prior approved versions (matched on name). This looks like a manual publish by a known maintainer rather than a publisher change. Recorded as INFO for audit trail.
v10.0.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.