0vulns-dependency-confusion-poc
Simple PoC package for testing for dependency confusion vulnerabilities.
This report shows the evidence for 0vulns-dependency-confusion-poc@1.0.0. 1 of 2 known versions is blocked or flagged. The newest version, 0.0.1-security, is allowed. See all versions.
AI Security Review
scanned 4mo ago · by lpm-firewall-aiDirect source inspection found only package.json, but it contains an automatic preinstall webhook beacon that exfiltrates host metadata. This is malicious install-time data exfiltration despite being labeled as a PoC.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- package.json defines a preinstall lifecycle hook that runs automatically during npm install.
- preinstall invokes wget to webhook.site with user=$(whoami), path=$(pwd), and hostname=$(hostname).
- test script repeats the same host/user/path exfiltration command when user-invoked.
- Package description states it is a dependency confusion PoC, aligning the behavior with install-time reconnaissance.
- Only package.json is present; no additional JS payload or persistence files were found.
- No credential file reads, destructive commands, or binary/native loading were found.
Source & flagged code
2 flagged · loading sourcePackage defines install-time lifecycle scripts.
package.jsonView on unpkgInstall-time lifecycle script is not statically allowlisted and needs review.
package.jsonView on unpkgFindings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to 0vulns-dependency-confusion-poc@1.0.0.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing 0vulns-dependency-confusion-poc@1.0.0. Remove it from direct dependencies and check your lockfile for transitive copies.
- Choose an independently verified alternative or release. This report does not establish that other versions are safe.
- If this version ran, investigate the affected machine and build environment. Rotate credentials it could access and rebuild from a trusted environment.
Evidence last updated: .
Source advisory published: .
Think this verdict is wrong? Dispute it on GitHub or read how reports are produced.