@interfere/constants
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| provenance | missing-githead | AI (provenance): Published via GitHub Actions; gitHead absence is a CI config change, not a supply-chain indicator for this package. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established package; lack of Sigstore provenance is a process gap, not a security risk for this package. | ai |
Versions (showing 11 of 11)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 9.0.3 | 1 / 6 | |
| 9.0.2 | 1 / 6 | |
| 9.0.1 | 1 / 4 | |
| 9.0.0 | 1 / 4 | |
| 8.1.2 | 1 / 4 | |
| 8.1.0 | 1 / 4 | |
| 4.0.0 | 1 / 4 | |
| 1.0.3 | 1 / 4 | |
| 1.0.2 | 1 / 4 | |
| 1.0.1 | 1 / 4 | |
| 1.0.0 | 1 / 4 |
v9.0.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v9.0.2
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 (skve) than the most recent previously approved version (GitHub Actions) on 2026-07-10, but skve 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.