@sarimarcus/content-sites-ui@0.42.0
Universal Astro UI components, layout shell and design tokens shared by the content sites.
AI Security Review
scanned 14d ago · by lpm-firewall-aiThe manifest exposes UI feature modules and has no lifecycle scripts. Inspected network behavior is tied to the package’s affiliate and analytics features or to caller-configured WebMCP tools; no credential collection, unrelated disclosure, or other concrete attack was identified.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- The manifest exports UI, layout, affiliate, search, and SEO modules and declares no lifecycle scripts. The required source paths describe UI components, styles, and page features.
- Analytics is set up through an exported function and checks analytics consent before pushing events to the page data layer. Affiliate scripts use vendor origins and load on interaction; remote WebMCP calls require configured tools and an endpoint, then run when a tool is called.
- The scanner’s Astro parser limitations do not by themselves show malicious behavior; inspected source describes component rendering and its related runtime behavior.
Source & flagged code
8 flaggedA bounded semantic-analysis stage reached its safety limit; remaining detectors completed, but this package requires AI review.
src/affiliate/AffiliateBandShell.astroView on unpkgThe manifest exports UI, layout, affiliate, search, and SEO modules and declares no lifecycle scripts. The required source paths describe UI components, styles, and page features.
src/affiliate/AffiliateBandShell.astroView on unpkg · L1Findings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @sarimarcus/content-sites-ui@0.42.0.
See all versions of @sarimarcus/content-sites-ui for other recorded verdicts.
- Review the evidence and your use of @sarimarcus/content-sites-ui@0.42.0 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.