animate-css-vite
This report shows the evidence for animate-css-vite@1.0.1, the only known version.
This package appears in our research on the fake Tailwind CSS plugins, with how it works, the full package list and what to do if you installed it.
OpenSSF/OSV Malicious Advisory
imported 3mo ago · by OpenSSF/OSVOpenSSF/OSV advisory MAL-2026-14226 confirms this npm version as malicious.
Advisory
MAL-2026-14226
Source
OpenSSF Malicious Packages via OSV
Summary
Malicious code in animate-css-vite (npm)
Details
plugin.js contains an RC4/base64 string-array obfuscated function invoked from the exported createPlugin factory. When a consumer's build instantiates the plugin, it constructs a URL at runtime, calls fetch() against it, base64-decodes the response body, and executes the result via new Function(param, decoded)(require) inside a retry loop (up to 10 attempts, 60s timeout each). The obfuscation (130-entry RC4 string array with two indirection decoders and a self-defending console-hook stub) hides the network destination and the fetch/exec wiring; a legitimate PostCSS plugin for vendor prefixes and CSS variables has no reason to fetch and evaluate remote code. The eval runs with require in scope, giving the remote operator arbitrary code execution inside the consumer's build process.
References
Source & flagged code
0 flaggedNo flagged code excerpts are attached to this scan.
Findings
1 High
HighOsv Malicious Advisory
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to animate-css-vite@1.0.1.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing animate-css-vite@1.0.1. 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.