@lexical/mark
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Maintainers
Keywords
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| provenance | publisher-changed | AI (provenance): Transition from manual publish to GitHub Actions CI/CD with SLSA provenance; expected for facebook/lexical. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@lexical/utils | AI (phantom-deps): @lexical/utils is a declared dep in same org scope; likely re-exported or used indirectly. | ai | |
| source-diff | obfuscated-file:dist/LexicalMark.prod.js | AI (source-diff): Standard minified production build output for this package; stable across versions. | ai | |
| provenance | missing-githead | AI (provenance): Publish-environment change for a well-established Meta package; not a security signal. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established Facebook/Lexical monorepo package; provenance attestation is a process improvement, not a security blocker for this well-known package. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@lexical/utils | AI (dependencies): @lexical/utils is a sibling package from the same Facebook/Meta Lexical monorepo, always published in lockstep at the same version. This finding is a stable false positive for this package. | ai |
Versions (showing 7 of 107)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 0.3.2 | 1 / 0 | |
| 0.3.1 | 1 / 0 | |
| 0.3.0 | 1 / 0 | |
| 0.2.9 | 1 / 0 | |
| 0.2.8 | 1 / 0 | |
| 0.2.7 | 1 / 0 | |
| 0.2.6 | 1 / 0 |
v0.3.2
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 (zurfyx) than the most recent previously approved version (fantactuka) on 2022-06-06, but zurfyx 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.
v0.3.1
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 (fantactuka) than the most recent previously approved version (trueadm) on 2022-06-03, but fantactuka 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.
v0.3.0
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 (trueadm) than the most recent previously approved version (acywatson) on 2022-06-02, but trueadm 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.
v0.2.9
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 (thegreatercurve) than the most recent previously approved version (acywatson) on 2022-05-11, but thegreatercurve 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.
v0.2.8
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 (acywatson) than the most recent previously approved version (fantactuka) on 2022-05-11, but acywatson 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.
v0.2.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.2.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.