@tryghost/string
`npm install @tryghost/string --save`
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| source-diff | obfuscated-file:lib/strip-invisible-chars.js | AI (source-diff): Long line is a unicode regex literal from a cited public source, not obfuscated logic. | ai | |
| maintainer-change | maintainer-added | AI (maintainer-change): New maintainers are Ghost org accounts (rblstr-ghost, evanhahn-ghost, weylandswart); consistent with org-level team rotation. | ai | |
| maintainer-change | maintainer-removed | AI (maintainer-change): Removal of ibalosh alongside Ghost org account additions is consistent with routine team rotation, not a takeover. | ai | |
| provenance | publisher-changed | AI (provenance): Ghost Foundation migrated publishing to GitHub Actions CI with SLSA attestation; stable pattern for this org. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established Ghost Foundation package; lack of Sigstore provenance is a process gap, not a security signal for this package. | ai | |
| typosquat | typosquat.levenshtein:stripe | AI (typosquat): Legitimate Ghost Foundation scoped package; Levenshtein match to 'stripe' is coincidental. | ai |
Versions (showing 55 of 55)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 0.3.5 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.3.4 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.3.3 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.3.2 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.3.1 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.3.0 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.21 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.20 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.19 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.17 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.16 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.15 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.14 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.13 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.12 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.11 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.10 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.9 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.8 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.7 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.6 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.5 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.4 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.3 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.2 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.1 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.2.0 | 1 / 5 | |
| 0.1.27 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.26 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.25 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.24 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.23 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.22 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.21 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.20 | 1 / 4 | |
| 0.1.19 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.18 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.17 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.16 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.15 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.14 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.13 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.12 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.11 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.10 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.9 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.8 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.7 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.6 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.5 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.4 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.3 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.2 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.1 | 1 / 3 | |
| 0.1.0 | 1 / 3 |
v0.2.13
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.2.12
3 findingsNewly added source file contains lines over 3000 chars, suggesting minified or obfuscated code. New obfuscated files are a strong attack indicator.
[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 (mike182uk) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2024-04-25, but mike182uk 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.
v0.2.11
3 findingsNewly added source file contains lines over 3000 chars, suggesting minified or obfuscated code. New obfuscated files are a strong attack indicator.
[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 (9larsons) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2023-11-15, but 9larsons 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.
v0.2.10
3 findingsNewly added source file contains lines over 3000 chars, suggesting minified or obfuscated code. New obfuscated files are a strong attack indicator.
[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 (binary-koan) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2023-10-30, but binary-koan 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.
v0.2.9
3 findingsNewly added source file contains lines over 3000 chars, suggesting minified or obfuscated code. New obfuscated files are a strong attack indicator.
[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 (binary-koan) than the most recent previously approved version (sam-lord) on 2023-10-26, but binary-koan 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.
v0.2.8
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 (gargol) than the most recent previously approved version (sam-lord) on 2023-07-19, but gargol 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.
v0.2.7
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 (sam-lord) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2023-06-05, but sam-lord 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.
v0.2.6
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 (daniellockyer) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2023-05-08, but daniellockyer 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.
v0.2.5
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 (gargol) than the most recent previously approved version (kevinansfield) on 2023-04-12, but gargol 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.
v0.2.4
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 (kevinansfield) than the most recent previously approved version (daniellockyer) on 2023-03-15, but kevinansfield 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.
v0.2.3
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 (daniellockyer) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2023-03-09, but daniellockyer 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.
v0.2.2
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 (kevinansfield) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2022-11-29, but kevinansfield 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.
v0.2.1
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 (gargol) than the most recent previously approved version (rishabhgrg) on 2022-09-08, but gargol 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.
v0.2.0
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 (simonbackx) than the most recent previously approved version (rishabhgrg) on 2022-09-06, but simonbackx 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.
v0.1.27
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 (rishabhgrg) than the most recent previously approved version (simonbackx) on 2022-08-05, but rishabhgrg 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.
v0.1.26
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 (allouis) than the most recent previously approved version (simonbackx) on 2022-05-16, but allouis 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.
v0.1.25
2 findingsThis version was published by a different npm account (simonbackx) than the most recent previously approved version (allouis) on 2022-05-10. It has since remained available on npm for 1536 days without being unpublished, which is inconsistent with an account takeover — those are typically removed by npm shortly after discovery.
[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.24
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 (erisds) than the most recent previously approved version (allouis) on 2022-05-05, but erisds 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.
v0.1.23
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 (allouis) than the most recent previously approved version (kevinansfield) on 2022-02-23, but allouis 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.
v0.1.22
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 (allouis) than the most recent previously approved version (kevinansfield) on 2022-01-20, but allouis 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.
v0.1.21
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.20
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.19
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 (kevinansfield) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2021-05-10, but kevinansfield 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.
v0.1.18
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 (daniellockyer) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2021-04-16, but daniellockyer 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.
v0.1.17
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 (gargol) than the most recent previously approved version (daniellockyer) on 2021-02-08, but gargol 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.
v0.1.16
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.15
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 (daniellockyer) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2021-01-07, but daniellockyer 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.
v0.1.14
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 (allouis) than the most recent previously approved version (gargol) on 2020-11-02, but allouis 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.
v0.1.13
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 (gargol) than the most recent previously approved version (daniellockyer) on 2020-10-13, but gargol 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.
v0.1.12
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 (gargol) than the most recent previously approved version (daniellockyer) on 2020-09-30, but gargol 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.
v0.1.11
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 (daniellockyer) than the most recent previously approved version (erisds) on 2020-08-13, but daniellockyer 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.
v0.1.10
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 (gargol) than the most recent previously approved version (erisds) on 2020-08-04, but gargol 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.
v0.1.9
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.8
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 (daniellockyer) than the most recent previously approved version (erisds) on 2020-04-03, but daniellockyer 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.
v0.1.7
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 (erisds) than the most recent previously approved version (kevinansfield) on 2020-03-26, but erisds 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.
v0.1.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.5
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.1.3
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 (kevinansfield) than the most recent previously approved version (erisds) on 2019-05-03, but kevinansfield 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.
v0.1.2
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 (rishabhgrg) than the most recent previously approved version (erisds) on 2019-04-15, but rishabhgrg 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.
v0.1.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.1.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.