@passioncode-ai/fabric-agent-adapter@0.53.1
Create Fabric-compatible agents, run them as always-alive local services with dashboards (fabric-service/0.1), and adapt existing projects to the Fabric Agent Contract. This package is the installer CLI.
AI Security Review
scanned 6d ago · by lpm-firewall-aiThe manifest has no install lifecycle hooks, and the executable is a CLI that runs its installer when invoked. The flagged agent-skill and supervisor writes are tied to user-run setup, while the inspected network helpers use configured service or key-set sources.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- The manifest declares a test script and a CLI binary, with no install, preinstall, or postinstall lifecycle hook.
- The package describes itself as an installer CLI; the binary dispatches to its main routine when the CLI is run.
- The CLI copies the package's own skills into the user's agent skills directory during that command.
- Supervisor setup is provided as an exported helper for the package's stated purpose of running local services; no automatic caller was found.
- The service helpers can write supervisor configuration and make network requests, but the inspected code exposes these as explicit setup or configured-key-fetch operations.
Source & flagged code
6 flaggedManifest-trigger-reachable source writes behavior-bearing configuration into a user or project AI-agent control surface.
bin/fabric-agent-adapter.jsView on unpkgPackage source references dynamic require/import behavior.
bin/fabric-agent-adapter.jsView on unpkg · L14Findings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @passioncode-ai/fabric-agent-adapter@0.53.1.
See all versions of @passioncode-ai/fabric-agent-adapter for other recorded verdicts.
- Review the evidence and your use of @passioncode-ai/fabric-agent-adapter@0.53.1 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.