@spectrum-web-components/tooltip
`<sp-tooltip>` allow users to get contextual help or information about specific components when hovering or focusing on them.
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Maintainers
Keywords
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Adobe monorepo package; provenance absence is consistent across all versions and not a risk indicator here. | ai |
Versions (showing 17 of 17)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.12.2 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.12.1 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.12.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.11.2 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.11.1 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.11.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.10.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.9.1 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.9.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.8.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.7.0 | 4 / 0 | |
| 1.6.0 | 4 / 1 | |
| 1.1.0 | 4 / 1 | |
| 1.0.3 | 4 / 1 | |
| 1.0.2 | 4 / 1 | |
| 1.0.1 | 4 / 1 | |
| 1.0.0 | 4 / 1 |
v1.12.2
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v1.1.0
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 (rajrock38) than the most recent previously approved version (pvashish) on 2025-01-29, but rajrock38 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.
v1.0.3
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 (rubenc) than the most recent previously approved version (pvashish) on 2024-12-09, but rubenc 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.
v1.0.2
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 (pvashish) than the most recent previously approved version (rubenc) on 2024-11-26, but pvashish 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.
v1.0.1
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 (rajrock38) than the most recent previously approved version (rubenc) on 2024-11-11, but rajrock38 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.
v1.0.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.