@clerk/clerk-js@6.23.0
Clerk JS library
AI Security Review
scanned 4mo ago · by lpm-firewall-aiDirect source inspection found a normal published Clerk browser authentication bundle with no lifecycle hooks, no install-time execution, and no evidence of credential harvesting, persistence, destructive behavior, or AI-agent control-surface mutation. The suspicious scanner signals are attributable to minified bundled artifacts, expected browser network APIs, third-party wallet/payment/captcha integrations, and bundled password-strength data.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- package.json has no preinstall/install/postinstall lifecycle hooks; published entries are dist/clerk.js, dist/clerk.mjs, dist/clerk.native.js, and no-rhc wrappers.
- no-rhc/index.js only requires ../dist/clerk.no-rhc; no package-time execution beyond normal import.
- Bundled/minified dist files implement Clerk auth SDK runtime behavior, resource fetching, cookies/localStorage/session state, captcha, Stripe, and wallet integrations.
- Network URLs are package-aligned Clerk/telemetry/captcha/payment/wallet endpoints, not arbitrary exfiltration hosts.
- No AI-agent control-surface writes or lifecycle mutation strings found for .mcp, CLAUDE, Cursor, .claude, Codex, OPENAI, or ANTHROPIC.
- Static obfuscation signal is explained by large production bundles and bundled third-party dependencies including zxcvbn password lists and wallet SDK code.
Source & flagged code
1 flaggedPackage metadata claims a different repository identity while copied source loads a runtime dependency bridge.
dist/clerk.native.jsView on unpkg · L17Findings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @clerk/clerk-js@6.23.0.
See all versions of @clerk/clerk-js for other recorded verdicts.
- Review the evidence and your use of @clerk/clerk-js@6.23.0 before allowing it. Restrict the permissions described in this report.
- Choose an independently verified alternative or release. This report does not establish that other versions are safe.
Evidence last updated: .
Think this verdict is wrong? Dispute it on GitHub or read how reports are produced.