claims-historical-claims-api-adapters
API client bindings
This report shows the evidence for claims-historical-claims-api-adapters@35.7.6, the only known version.
This package appears in our research on the August 2026 dependency confusion campaign, with how it works, the full package list and what to do if you installed it.
AI Security Review
scanned 3mo ago · by lpm-firewall-aiThis is an import-time staged remote-code-execution chain unrelated to the advertised API client wrapper. The lack of lifecycle hooks does not mitigate execution on ordinary package import.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- index.js imports _loader on every package import.
- _loader.js downloads platform binaries from workers.dev hosts or DNS TXT records.
- _loader.js writes the payload to /var/tmp or TEMP, chmods it, then launches it detached.
- Loader uses a hidden marker file to rate-limit repeated execution.
- package.json has no lifecycle scripts.
- The exported API in index.js is otherwise a minimal inert wrapper.
Source & flagged code
4 flagged · loading sourceSource downloads or fetches remote code and executes it.
_loader.jsView on unpkg · L2A package entrypoint or install-time lifecycle script reaches a source file with blocking dangerous behavior.
_loader.jsView on unpkg · L2Source file is highly similar to a previously finalized malicious package; route for source-aware review.
lib/telemetry.jsView on unpkgFindings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to claims-historical-claims-api-adapters@35.7.6.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing claims-historical-claims-api-adapters@35.7.6. 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.