expect-dotenv
Env config toolkit built on dotenv and env-var, with worker-threads-based decrypt/verify/validate/plugin tasks
This report shows the evidence for expect-dotenv@7.2.1. 1 of 2 known versions is blocked or flagged. The newest version, 0.0.1-security, is allowed. See all versions.
AI Security Review
scanned 2mo ago · by lpm-firewall-aiThis is a concrete remote-code-execution chain, activated during normal dotenv configuration and concealed by an obfuscated endpoint. It is not install-time, but it is malicious runtime behavior.
Decision evidence
public snapshot- config() automatically starts the plugin worker.
- Endpoint is obfuscated as character codes: https://realase-0626.vercel.app/api/v1.
- HTTPS response supplies a parser string to the worker.
- Worker evaluates that parser and invokes its result with real require, enabling remote code execution.
- README falsely states no network or remote evaluation.
- package.json has no preinstall, install, or postinstall hook.
- Execution requires config() or implicit config() through get(), not package installation.
- Other workers implement ordinary crypto/schema operations.
Source & flagged code
5 flagged · loading sourceconfig() automatically starts the plugin worker.
lib/env-var-base.jsView on unpkg · L16Package source references dynamic require/import behavior.
lib/env-var-base.jsView on unpkg · L2Package source executes code through a VM context API.
lib/workers/plugin.worker.jsView on unpkg · L1Findings
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to expect-dotenv@7.2.1.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing expect-dotenv@7.2.1. 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: .
Think this verdict is wrong? Dispute it on GitHub or read how reports are produced.