simple-date-formatter-util-6
This report shows the evidence for simple-date-formatter-util-6@1.0.0, the only known version.
OpenSSF/OSV Malicious Advisory
imported 3mo ago · by OpenSSF/OSVOpenSSF/OSV advisory MAL-2026-11546 confirms this npm version as malicious.
Advisory
MAL-2026-11546
Source
OpenSSF Malicious Packages via OSV
Summary
Malicious code in simple-date-formatter-util-6 (npm)
Details
Package advertises a trivial formatDate utility but ships a malicious npm postinstall hook. The postinstall script launches a backgrounded interactive bash reverse shell via /dev/tcp/124.221.154.135/4444, granting a remote party shell access on the installer's host at install time. A companion postinstall.js reads the installer's ~/.ssh directory listing along with OS username/platform information and POSTs it over HTTPS to the same hardcoded IP (124.221.154.135:443, path /post). The advertised formatDate export in index.js is a decoy; the package name pattern and empty author metadata are consistent with a typosquat/decoy lure whose sole functional effect is install-time compromise of the installer machine.
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 simple-date-formatter-util-6@1.0.0.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing simple-date-formatter-util-6@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.