@openzeppelin/merkle-tree
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@metamask/abi-utils | AI (dependencies): @metamask/abi-utils is a well-known MetaMask-maintained Ethereum ABI library; a legitimate and expected dependency for this Ethereum utility package. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established OpenZeppelin package from a known publisher; lack of provenance is common and not a risk signal here. | ai |
Versions (showing 9 of 9)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0.8 | 2 / 13 | |
| 1.0.7 | 4 / 13 | |
| 1.0.6 | 2 / 6 | |
| 1.0.5 | 2 / 6 | |
| 1.0.4 | 2 / 6 | |
| 1.0.3 | 2 / 6 | |
| 1.0.2 | 2 / 6 | |
| 1.0.1 | 2 / 6 | |
| 1.0.0 | 2 / 6 |
v1.0.7
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 (amxx) than the most recent previously approved version (frangio) on 2024-07-15, but amxx 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.
v1.0.6
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 (amxx) than the most recent previously approved version (frangio) on 2024-01-28, but amxx 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.
v1.0.4
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. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
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.