@natrave/notification-service-types
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| maintainer-change | maintainer-takeover | AI (maintainer-change): Provenance data confirms known maintainer email-matched, not a hijack. | ai | |
| publish-pattern | dormant-publish | AI (publish-pattern): Dormancy explained by known-maintainer manual publish, low-traffic types package. | ai |
Versions (showing 10 of 10)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.2.0 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.73 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.72 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.71 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.70 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.69 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.68 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.67 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.66 | 0 / 16 | |
| 1.1.65 | 0 / 16 |
v1.2.0
3 findingsAll previous maintainers (na_trave, th38amorim, d-uartepereira) were replaced by new maintainers (mateus_duarte). This is a strong signal of a potential package hijack and requires careful review.
Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (mateus_duarte) than the most recent previously approved version (na_trave) on 2026-07-15, but mateus_duarte is listed as a maintainer on prior approved versions (matched on email). This looks like a manual publish by a known maintainer rather than a publisher change. Recorded as INFO for audit trail.
v1.1.65
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.