@lage-run/hasher
Hasher for Lage Targets
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Maintainers
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@lage-run/globby | AI (dependencies): @lage-run/globby is a first-party scoped dependency under the same Microsoft lage namespace; stable false positive for this package. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:glob-hasher | AI (dependencies): glob-hasher is a Microsoft-published native hashing utility integral to the lage build ecosystem; stable dependency for this package. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@lage-run/logger | AI (dependencies): @lage-run/logger is a sibling package in the same Microsoft lage monorepo; no supply-chain risk beyond normal unvetted-dep flag. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established Microsoft monorepo package; lack of Sigstore provenance is common and not a disqualifier here given the package's age and ecosystem context. | ai | |
| bogus-package | bogus-package | AI (bogus-package): This is a legitimate Microsoft monorepo sub-package; minimal README and no keywords are expected for internal build tooling packages, not spam indicators. | ai |
Versions (showing 55 of 55)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.10.11 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.10 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.9 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.8 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.7 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.6 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.5 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.4 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.3 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.2 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.1 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.10.0 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.9.7 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.9.6 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.9.5 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.9.4 | 9 / 4 | |
| 1.9.3 | 8 / 4 | |
| 1.9.2 | 8 / 4 | |
| 1.9.1 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.9.0 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.8.3 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.8.2 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.8.1 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.8.0 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.7.0 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.9 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.8 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.7 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.6 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.5 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.4 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.3 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.2 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.1 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.6.0 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.5.0 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.4.0 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.3.4 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.3.3 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.3.2 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.3.1 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.3.0 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.2.1 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.2.0 | 7 / 3 | |
| 1.1.2 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.1.1 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.1.0 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.0.7 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.0.6 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.0.5 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.0.4 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.0.3 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.0.2 | 8 / 3 | |
| 1.0.1 | 7 / 3 | |
| 1.0.0 | 7 / 3 |
v1.10.11
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v1.10.10
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v1.8.2
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 (ecraig12345_msft) than the most recent previously approved version (kenotron_msft) on 2025-04-17, but ecraig12345_msft 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.
v1.8.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.8.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.7.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.9
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.8
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.5
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.5.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.4.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.3.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.3.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.3.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.3.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.3.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.2.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.2.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.1.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.1.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.1.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.5
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.