@wethenorth12/bitcoinjs-wallet
This report shows the evidence for @wethenorth12/bitcoinjs-wallet@5.4.2, the only known version.
OpenSSF/OSV Malicious Advisory
imported 3mo ago · by OpenSSF/OSVOpenSSF/OSV advisory MAL-2026-12088 confirms this npm version as malicious.
Advisory
MAL-2026-12088
Source
OpenSSF Malicious Packages via OSV
Summary
Malicious code in @wethenorth12/bitcoinjs-wallet (npm)
Details
On require(), index.js collects the full process.env object together with hostname, username, home directory, platform, current working directory, and a timestamp, JSON-encodes and base64-encodes the payload, and issues an HTTPS GET to api.telegram.org/bot<token>/sendMessage with a hardcoded bot token and chat_id. A tmp-file flag suppresses re-sending. The package advertises itself as a 'Drop-in replacement for bitcoinjs-lib' under an unrelated scope and ships only stub wallet functions alongside this exfiltration payload, consistent with a typosquat lure targeting bitcoinjs-lib users. In modern development and CI environments, process.env routinely contains cloud credentials, npm/GitHub tokens, and database passwords, all of which are sent to the attacker-controlled Telegram chat on module load.
References
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 @wethenorth12/bitcoinjs-wallet@5.4.2.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing @wethenorth12/bitcoinjs-wallet@5.4.2. 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.