@pandacss/node
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Maintainers
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:pkg-types | AI (dependencies): pkg-types is a well-known utility for reading package metadata; appropriate for a CSS tooling package. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:lodash.merge | AI (phantom-deps): lodash.merge is a legitimate runtime dependency; phantom detection is a false positive for this package's usage pattern. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@pandacss/token-dictionary | AI (phantom-deps): Same-org @pandacss scoped package; legitimate dependency within the PandaCSS monorepo. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:ts-morph | AI (phantom-deps): ts-morph is a legitimate runtime dependency in this monorepo package; phantom detection is a false positive for indirect/transitive usage patterns. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:pkg-types | AI (phantom-deps): pkg-types is a legitimate runtime dependency; phantom detection is a false positive for this package's usage pattern. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:pluralize | AI (phantom-deps): pluralize is a legitimate runtime dependency; phantom detection is a false positive for this package's usage pattern. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:ts-pattern | AI (phantom-deps): ts-pattern is a legitimate runtime dependency; phantom detection is a false positive for this package's usage pattern. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established package from a well-known publisher (segunadebayo/chakra-ui); lack of provenance is common and not a risk signal here. | ai | |
| typosquat | typosquat.levenshtein:zod | AI (typosquat): @pandacss/node is a scoped package in the official pandacss namespace; levenshtein distance to 'zod' is a false positive with no typosquat intent. | ai |
Versions (showing 27 of 27)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.11.2 | 32 / 7 | |
| 1.11.1 | 32 / 7 | |
| 1.11.0 | 32 / 7 | |
| 1.10.0 | 32 / 7 | |
| 1.9.1 | 29 / 7 | |
| 1.9.0 | 29 / 7 | |
| 1.8.2 | 29 / 7 | |
| 1.8.1 | 29 / 7 | |
| 1.8.0 | 29 / 7 | |
| 1.7.3 | 29 / 7 | |
| 1.7.2 | 29 / 7 | |
| 1.7.1 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.7.0 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.6.1 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.6.0 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.5.1 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.5.0 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.4.3 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.4.2 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.4.1 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.4.0 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.3.1 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.3.0 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.2.0 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.1.0 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.0.1 | 28 / 8 | |
| 1.0.0 | 28 / 8 |
v1.11.2
2 findingsThis version was published by a different npm account than previous versions on 2026-06-04. This could indicate a legitimate maintainer transition or an account compromise.
Published via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v1.11.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.11.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.10.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.9.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.9.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.8.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.8.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.8.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.7.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.7.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.7.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.7.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.6.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.6.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.5.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.5.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.1.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.