registry / @zuplo/editor / 1.0.35243602477
@zuplo/editor@1.0.35243602477
Local development editor for the Zuplo CLI
AI Security Review
scanned 16d ago · by lpm-firewall-aiThe manifest exposes editor modules without lifecycle hooks. Inspected flagged locations match editor functionality or bundled language-service code, and provide no evidence of a concrete attack.
Static reason
High-risk behavior combination matched malicious policy.
Trigger
Importing the exposed editor modules or loading their browser editor assets.
Impact
No attack impact was identified.
Mechanism
The inspected code references editor integrations and bundled editor libraries; no concrete malicious action was established.
AI rationale
The manifest exposes editor modules without lifecycle hooks. Inspected flagged locations match editor functionality or bundled language-service code, and provide no evidence of a concrete attack.
Decision evidence
public snapshotAI called this Clean at 94.0% confidence as Benign with low false-positive risk.
Evidence for AI clean decision
- package.json lists editor module exports and no lifecycle script; its published files are README.md, LICENSE, and dist.
- The editor chunk lists detected editor markers and protocol URLs for opening files; it does not show agent configuration writes.
- The editor API chunk applies CSS rules to Monaco cursor elements.
- The browser bundles reference editor chunks, while the JSON worker and CodeMirror file contain editor-library code.
- The TypeScript worker’s child_process match is in a list of Node.js module names, consistent with language-service code.
Evidence against
Behavioral surface
ChildProcessEnvironmentVarsFilesystemNetwork
HighEntropyStringsMinifiedPossibleObfuscationUrlStrings
Source & flagged code
5 flaggeddist/client/static/js/codemirror-6ITIKbGP.jsView file
7contains invisible/control Unicode U+200B (zero width space)
height: `+(r-t)+`px`))}function d(t,n,r){var a=R(i,t),o=a.text.length,d,f;function p(n,r){return jr(e,B(t,n),`div`,a,r)}function m(t,n,r){var i=Lr(e,a,null,t),o=n==`ltr`==(r==`after`)?`left`:`right`;return p(r==
Critical
Trojan Source Unicode
Source contains bidi control or invisible Unicode characters associated with Trojan Source attacks.
dist/client/static/js/codemirror-6ITIKbGP.jsView on unpkg · L7dist/client/static/ts.worker-DFduhuek.jsView file
6Cross-file remote execution chain: dist/client/static/ts.worker-DFduhuek.js spawns dist/index.js; helper contains network access plus dynamic code execution.
L6: `).slice(2).join(`
L7: `))}},ee=class extends Error{constructor(e,t){super(e),this.name=`ListenerLeakError`,this.stack=t}},te=class extends Error{constructor(e,t){super(e),this.name=`ListenerRefusalError...
L8: `||e===` `}var li=class{constructor(e,t,n){this.changes=e,this.moves=t,this.hitTimeout=n}},ui=class{constructor(e,t){this.lineRangeMapping=e,this.changes=t}};function di(e,t,n=(e,t...
...
L43: `)}t.writeSync(r,`]
L44: `),t.closeSync(r),br(`endDumpTypes`),xr(`Dump types`,`beginDumpTypes`,`endDumpTypes`)}function x(){o&&t.writeFileSync(o,JSON.stringify(s))}e.dumpLegend=x})(Mr||={});var Nr=Mr.start...
L45: `,n=c;continue}c++}r
Findings
1 Critical2 High4 Medium5 Low
CriticalTrojan Source Unicodedist/client/static/js/codemirror-6ITIKbGP.js
HighChild Process
HighCross File Remote Execution Contextdist/client/static/ts.worker-DFduhuek.js
MediumNetwork
MediumEnvironment Vars
MediumOversized Source Filedist/client/static/ts.worker-DFduhuek.js
MediumStructural Risk Force Deep Review
LowFilesystem
LowHigh Entropy Strings
LowUrl Strings
LowSuspicious Lifecycle Evidencepackage.json
LowSuspicious Lifecycle Evidencepackage.json
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to @zuplo/editor@1.0.35243602477.
See all versions of @zuplo/editor for other recorded verdicts.
- Review the evidence and your use of @zuplo/editor@1.0.35243602477 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.