@chem-x/create-chemx@26.9.17-1437
Chemical X Protocol: Private drop-in architecture starter kit and capsule generator
AI Security Review
scanned 11d ago · by lpm-firewall-aiThe unconsented postinstall mutation creates an AI-agent control surface in the consumer project, meeting the block policy. The inspected excerpts support configuration hijacking but do not establish credential theft.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- The package manifest runs a postinstall script.
- That hook invokes MCP configuration for the consumer directory without a consent prompt.
- The hook creates and writes Cursor and VS Code MCP configuration files in the consumer project.
- The MCP entry can launch the Chemical X server through a local script or npx.
- A separate installer path contains instructions directed at AI agents.
- The installer spec confirms that the MCP installer creates project-level Cursor configuration.
- The inspected hook skips installation when the target directory is the package itself.
- The inspected behavior configures an MCP server; these excerpts do not show credential collection or exfiltration.
Source & flagged code
12 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 unpkgPackage contains a critical-looking secret pattern.
cli/errors/errors.spec.jsView on unpkg · L27Findings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @chem-x/create-chemx@26.9.17-1437.
See all versions of @chem-x/create-chemx for other recorded verdicts.
- Avoid installing @chem-x/create-chemx@26.9.17-1437. 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: .
Think this verdict is wrong? Dispute it on GitHub or read how reports are produced.