@gooddata/experimental-workspace
GoodData SDK - Experimental workspace for features in dev
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
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| email-domain | unclaimed-email:rodri360.com | AI (email-domain): No malicious behavior tied to this; low-severity metadata hygiene issue for trusted CI publisher. | ai | |
| maintainer-change | maintainer-added | AI (maintainer-change): Org-wide roster sync from trusted gooddata-ci publisher with strong track record. | ai | |
| maintainer-change | maintainer-removed | AI (maintainer-change): Consistent with routine maintainer roster cleanup across GoodData's large package set. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:tslib | AI (phantom-deps): tslib is a known implicit TypeScript runtime dep; stable false positive for this org's packages. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): GoodData CI pipeline does not emit Sigstore provenance; consistent across all versions. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:lodash | AI (phantom-deps): lodash referenced in config files; consistent pattern across GoodData SDK packages. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@gooddata/sdk-backend-spi | AI (phantom-deps): Same-org peer dependency; stable false positive for this monorepo package. | ai |
Versions (showing 14 of 14)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 9.9.2 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.9.1 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.9.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.8.1 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.8.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.7.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.6.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.5.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.4.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.3.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.2.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.1.0 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.0.1 | 4 / 21 | |
| 9.0.0 | 4 / 21 |
v9.9.2
2 findingsMaintainer email '[email protected]' uses domain 'rodri360.com' which has no DNS records. An attacker could register this domain to hijack the maintainer identity.
[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.9.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.8.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.8.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.7.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.6.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.5.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.4.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.3.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.2.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.1.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.0.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.0.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.