@netnodeag/kraftwerk@0.34.1
Open-source agentic workspace for teams — where people and AI agents get work done together: agents (Claude Code, Codex, Pi), skills, shared knowledge, repeatable workflows, and deterministic verification
AI Security Review
scanned 2mo ago · by lpm-firewall-aiNo concrete malicious install-time or covert exfiltration chain was found, but the package exposes high-impact agent and workflow execution paths with automatic approval and credential forwarding. Treat it as a dangerous capability that warrants a warning rather than a publish block.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- The inspector starts a detached npx workflow command with automatic approval.
- Sandbox runs pass configured environment variables and available API keys into a container.
- Workflow script phases execute configured Bash text.
- Remote workflow sources are cloned and later hard-reset from their configured Git source.
- The agent-session context directs agents to run workflows with automatic approval.
- The manifest has no preinstall, install, postinstall, or prepare hook; its only publish hook builds artifacts.
- No self-dependency is declared.
- The flagged SQL, VBScript, and editor assets are inspectable frontend syntax/editor bundles.
- No fixed secret-exfiltration endpoint or hidden payload downloader was found.
- The risky operations are reachable through workflow, UI, sandbox, or remote-source features rather than package installation.
Source & flagged code
9 flaggedPackage source references shell execution.
inspector/dist/assets/editor-CXrDJOv_.jsView on unpkg · L114Findings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @netnodeag/kraftwerk@0.34.1.
See all versions of @netnodeag/kraftwerk for other recorded verdicts.
- Review the evidence and your use of @netnodeag/kraftwerk@0.34.1 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.