@lexical/list
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Without SLSA provenance there is no cryptographic link between this tarball and the public source — the axios compromise (March 2026) relied on exactly this gap.
Maintainers
Keywords
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| source-diff | obfuscated-file:dist/LexicalList.prod.mjs | AI (source-diff): Standard minified production ESM bundle for Lexical; stable pattern across versions. | ai | |
| source-diff | obfuscated-file:dist/LexicalList.prod.js | AI (source-diff): Standard minified production bundle for Lexical; stable pattern across versions. | ai | |
| provenance | missing-githead | AI (provenance): Lexical is a well-established Facebook/Meta project; missing gitHead likely reflects a CI/CD pipeline change, not a supply chain compromise. Publisher has clean track record. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): @lexical/list is a Meta OSS monorepo package; lack of Sigstore provenance is a known gap for this package family, not a security risk on its own. | ai | |
| typosquat | typosquat.levenshtein:jest | AI (typosquat): @lexical/list is a scoped package in the official Facebook/Meta Lexical editor monorepo; Levenshtein similarity to 'jest' is coincidental and not indicative of typosquatting. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@lexical/selection | AI (dependencies): Sibling package within the Lexical monorepo, always pinned to the same version. Expected dependency. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@lexical/extension | AI (dependencies): Sibling package within the Lexical monorepo, always pinned to the same version. Expected dependency. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@lexical/utils | AI (dependencies): Sibling package within the Lexical monorepo, always pinned to the same version. Expected dependency. | ai |
Versions (showing 23 of 23)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 0.45.0 | 5 / 0 | |
| 0.44.0 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.43.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.42.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.41.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.40.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.39.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.38.2 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.38.1 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.38.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.37.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.36.2 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.36.1 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.36.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 0.35.0 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.34.0 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.33.1 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.33.0 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.32.1 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.32.0 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.31.2 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.31.1 | 3 / 0 | |
| 0.31.0 | 3 / 0 |
v0.45.0
3 findingsNewly added source file contains lines over 3000 chars, suggesting minified or obfuscated code. New obfuscated files are a strong attack indicator.
Newly added source file contains lines over 3000 chars, suggesting minified or obfuscated code. New obfuscated files are a strong attack indicator.
[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.43.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.42.0
2 findingsThis version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: zurfyx.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.41.0
2 findingsThis version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: zurfyx.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.40.0
2 findingsThis version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: zurfyx.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.39.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.38.2
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.38.1
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.38.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.37.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.36.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.36.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.36.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.35.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.34.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.33.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.33.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.32.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.32.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.31.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.31.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.31.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.