@xiping/node-utils
node-utils
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
Without SLSA provenance there is no cryptographic link between this tarball and the public source — the axios compromise (March 2026) relied on exactly this gap.
Maintainers
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): CI-published monorepo package; no provenance is consistent across all versions and poses no direct security risk here. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:fs-extra | AI (phantom-deps): Declared in package.json but only referenced in config/build files; consistent with monorepo tooling pattern across versions. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:chalk | AI (phantom-deps): chalk is a declared runtime dependency; phantom-dep heuristic fires because it's not directly imported in analyzed files. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:srt-parser-2 | AI (phantom-deps): srt-parser-2 is a declared runtime dependency; phantom-dep heuristic fires because it's not directly imported in analyzed files. | ai |
Versions (showing 25 of 25)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0.92 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.91 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.89 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.84 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.83 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.82 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.79 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.77 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.76 | 5 / 3 | |
| 1.0.70 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.69 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.68 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.66 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.65 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.64 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.63 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.62 | 4 / 3 | |
| 1.0.61 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.0.60 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.0.53 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.0.52 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.0.50 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.0.45 | 6 / 3 | |
| 1.0.21 | 0 / 3 | |
| 1.0.18 | 0 / 3 |
v1.0.92
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.91
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.89
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.84
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.83
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.82
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.79
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.77
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.76
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.70
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.69
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.68
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.66
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.65
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.64
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.63
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.62
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.61
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.60
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.53
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.52
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.50
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.45
1 findingPackage was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v1.0.21
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v1.0.18
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.