umi
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established package; provenance attestation is a best-practice signal, not a blocker. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@umijs/core | AI (dependencies): Internal monorepo sub-package pinned to same version; expected pattern for umi releases. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@umijs/bundler-utils | AI (dependencies): Internal monorepo sub-package pinned to same version; expected pattern for umi releases. | ai | |
| dependencies | unvetted-dep:@umijs/utils | AI (dependencies): Internal monorepo sub-package pinned to same version; expected pattern for umi releases. | ai | |
| publish-pattern | dormant-publish | AI (publish-pattern): Umi is an active monorepo; version gaps are common between major release cycles for this established package. | ai | |
| typosquat | typosquat.levenshtein:uuid | AI (typosquat): umi is a well-known React framework brand, not a typo of uuid. | ai | |
| bogus-package | bogus-package | AI (bogus-package): Sparse metadata is typical for monorepo sub-packages; umi is a legitimate established framework. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@umijs/renderer-react | AI (phantom-deps): @umijs/renderer-react is a runtime dep used indirectly via config; stable false positive for this monorepo package. | ai | |
| typosquat | typosquat.levenshtein:joi | AI (typosquat): umi is a well-known React framework brand, not a typo of joi. | ai |
Versions (showing 100 of 252)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 4.6.82 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.81 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.80 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.79 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.78 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.77 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.76 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.75 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.74 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.73 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.72 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.71 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.70 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.69 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.68 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.67 | 11 / 1 | |
| 4.6.66 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.65 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.64 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.63 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.62 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.61 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.59 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.58 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.57 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.56 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.55 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.54 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.53 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.52 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.51 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.50 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.49 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.48 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.47 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.46 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.45 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.44 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.43 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.42 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.41 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.40 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.39 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.38 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.37 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.36 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.35 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.34 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.33 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.32 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.31 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.30 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.29 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.28 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.27 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.26 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.25 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.24 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.23 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.22 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.21 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.20 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.19 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.18 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.17 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.16 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.15 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.14 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.13 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.12 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.11 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.10 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.9 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.8 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.7 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.6 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.5 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.4 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.3 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.2 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.1 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.6.0 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.5.3 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.5.2 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.5.1 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.5.0 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.12 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.11 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.10 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.9 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.8 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.7 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.6 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.5 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.4 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.3 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.2 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.1 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.4.0 | 12 / 0 | |
| 4.3.36 | 12 / 0 |
v4.6.82
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.81
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.80
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.79
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.78
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.77
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.76
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.75
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.74
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.73
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.72
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.71
1 findingPublished via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.70
2 findingsThis version was published by a different npm account than previous versions on 2026-07-03. This could indicate a legitimate maintainer transition or an account compromise.
Published via CI/CD with Sigstore attestation (predicate: https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1). This is the strongest supply chain integrity signal.
v4.6.69
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v4.4.10
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.9
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.8
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.7
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.6
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.5
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.4
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.4.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v4.3.36
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.