@walletconnect/jsonrpc-provider
Provider for JSON-RPC
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
Keywords
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@walletconnect/safe-json | AI (phantom-deps): Same-org scoped dep, used indirectly; stable false positive. | ai |
Versions (showing 15 of 15)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0.14 | 3 / 28 | |
| 1.0.13 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.12 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.11 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.10 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.9 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.8 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.7 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.6 | 3 / 36 | |
| 1.0.5 | 2 / 34 | |
| 1.0.4 | 2 / 34 | |
| 1.0.3 | 2 / 34 | |
| 1.0.2 | 2 / 34 | |
| 1.0.1 | 2 / 34 | |
| 1.0.0 | 2 / 34 |
v1.0.12
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.11
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (gancho_walletconnect) than the most recent previously approved version (bkrem) on 2023-04-05, but gancho_walletconnect 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.
v1.0.10
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (gancho_walletconnect) than the most recent previously approved version (bkrem) on 2023-03-20, but gancho_walletconnect 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.
v1.0.9
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.8
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.7
2 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (bkrem) than the most recent previously approved version (pedrouid) on 2023-02-20, but bkrem 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 findingsPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
This version was published by a different npm account (bkrem) than the most recent previously approved version (pedrouid) on 2022-11-25, but bkrem 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.
v1.0.5
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.4
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.3
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.2
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.1
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.0
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.