@iebh/reflib
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:lodash-es | AI (phantom-deps): lodash-es is a declared runtime dep used via ESM imports; phantom-dep heuristic fires as false positive for this package. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Package has never had provenance; consistent across all versions, not a new risk signal. | ai |
Versions (showing 40 of 40)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 2.8.4 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.8.3 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.8.2 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.8.1 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.8.0 | 7 / 7 | |
| 2.7.2 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.7.0 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.7 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.6 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.5 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.4 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.3 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.2 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.1 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.6.0 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.5.9 | 7 / 6 | |
| 2.5.8 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.5.6 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.5.5 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.5.4 | 6 / 8 | |
| 2.5.3 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.5.2 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.5.1 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.9 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.8 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.7 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.6 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.5 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.4 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.3 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.2 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.1 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.4.0 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.3.6 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.3.4 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.3.3 | 4 / 7 | |
| 2.3.2 | 3 / 7 | |
| 2.3.1 | 3 / 7 | |
| 2.3.0 | 3 / 7 | |
| 2.2.3 | 3 / 7 |
v2.8.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.8.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.8.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.7.0
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (hash-bang) than the most recent previously approved version (irenepriya) on 2026-02-12, but hash-bang 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.
v2.6.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.6.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.6.5
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.6.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.6.2
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (hash-bang) than the most recent previously approved version (irenepriya) on 2026-02-12, but hash-bang 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.
v2.6.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.5.4
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (hash-bang) than the most recent previously approved version (connorf25) on 2025-02-26, but hash-bang 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.
v2.5.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.5.2
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (octian) than the most recent previously approved version (connorf25) on 2024-12-11, but octian 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.
v2.5.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.4.9
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (connorf25) than the most recent previously approved version (irenepriya) on 2024-12-06, but connorf25 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.
v2.4.8
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.4.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.4.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.4.5
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (irenepriya) than the most recent previously approved version (octian) on 2024-10-02, but irenepriya 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.
v2.4.4
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (octian) than the most recent previously approved version (hash-bang) on 2024-09-09, but octian 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.
v2.4.3
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (hash-bang) than the most recent previously approved version (octian) on 2024-09-05, but hash-bang 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.
v2.4.2
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (octian) than the most recent previously approved version (hash-bang) on 2024-08-13, but octian 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.
v2.4.1
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (octian) than the most recent previously approved version (hash-bang) on 2024-08-12, but octian 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.
v2.4.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v2.3.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v2.3.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.3.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.3.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.3.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v2.3.0
2 findings[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (connorf25) than the most recent previously approved version (hash-bang) on 2024-06-06, but connorf25 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.
v2.2.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.