@msar/workflow
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
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 battis to groton-it is consistent with org account consolidation; same author/repo org throughout. | ai |
Versions (showing 8 of 8)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 0.3.1 | 0 / 6 | |
| 0.3.0 | 0 / 6 | |
| 0.2.4 | 0 / 7 | |
| 0.2.3 | 0 / 7 | |
| 0.2.2 | 0 / 7 | |
| 0.2.1 | 0 / 8 | |
| 0.2.0 | 0 / 8 | |
| 0.1.0 | 0 / 7 |
v0.3.1
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (battis) than the most recent previously approved version (groton-it) on 2026-07-14, but battis 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.
v0.1.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.