@tanstack/start-fn-stubs
This report shows the evidence for @tanstack/start-fn-stubs@1.161.9. 2 of 2 known versions are blocked or flagged. See all versions.
OpenSSF/OSV Malicious Advisory
imported 4mo ago · by OpenSSF/OSVOpenSSF/OSV advisory MAL-2026-3488 confirms this npm version as malicious.
Advisory
MAL-2026-3488
Source
OpenSSF Malicious Packages via OSV
Summary
Malicious code in @tanstack/start-fn-stubs (npm)
Details
Any computer that has this package installed or running should be considered fully compromised. All secrets and keys stored on that computer should be rotated immediately from a different computer. The package should be removed, but as full control of the computer may have been given to an outside entity, there is no guarantee that removing the package will remove all malicious software resulting from installing it.
## Source: google-open-source-security (5e1924464368f0c5816ee84e000cc47017f44045140feafbbc9e685d847ed5a5) This package was compromised as part of the "Mini Shai-Hulud is back" worm by the TeamPCP threat actor.
The package will steal credentials and then propogate it to every package it has access to. The package also attempts to remain persistent.
Source & flagged code
0 flagged · loading sourceNo flagged code excerpts are attached to this scan.
Findings
1 High
HighOsv Malicious Advisory
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @tanstack/start-fn-stubs@1.161.9.
The same advisory and Firewall decision cover 2 recorded versions
1.161.12, 1.161.9
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing @tanstack/start-fn-stubs@1.161.9. 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: .
Source advisory published: .
This report uses published external intelligence. The advisory does not provide a separate source-code analysis for each listed version.
Think this verdict is wrong? Dispute it on GitHub or read how reports are produced.