@rspress/mdx-rs
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| semgrep | semgrep:child-process-import | AI (semgrep): Standard napi-rs loader pattern: runs 'which ldd' to detect musl vs gnu Linux for native binary selection. Hardcoded, benign, no user input or network involved. | ai | |
| semgrep | semgrep:child-process-execsync | AI (semgrep): Same napi-rs musl detection pattern — execSync('which ldd') is a hardcoded, safe command used only to identify the Linux libc variant for binary loading. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established package (946 days, 24 versions) from a trusted publisher; lack of provenance attestation is common and not a risk signal here. | ai |
Versions (showing 16 of 16)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 0.6.6 | 0 / 12 | |
| 0.6.5 | 0 / 12 | |
| 0.6.4 | 0 / 12 | |
| 0.6.3 | 0 / 12 | |
| 0.6.2 | 0 / 12 | |
| 0.6.1 | 0 / 12 | |
| 0.6.0 | 0 / 12 | |
| 0.5.7 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.5.6 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.5.5 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.5.4 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.5.3 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.5.2 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.5.1 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.5.0 | 0 / 10 | |
| 0.4.4 | 0 / 10 |
v0.6.5
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 (chenjiahan) than the most recent previously approved version (sanyuan0704) on 2025-01-13, but chenjiahan 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.
v0.6.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.6.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.6.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.6.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.6.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.5.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.5.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.5.5
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.5.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.5.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.5.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.5.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.5.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.4.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.