test12vv36
This report shows the evidence for test12vv36@99.99.99, the only known version.
This package appears in our research on the dependency confusion probes at version 99 and above, with how it works, the full package list and what to do if you installed it.
OpenSSF/OSV Malicious Advisory
imported 1mo ago · by OpenSSF/OSVOpenSSF/OSV advisory MAL-2026-16311 confirms this npm version as malicious.
Advisory
MAL-2026-16311
Source
OpenSSF Malicious Packages via OSV
Summary
Malicious code in test12vv36 (npm)
Details
test12vv36@99.99.99 declares both preinstall and postinstall lifecycle hooks that execute index.js on npm install. index.js issues an HTTP GET to a hardcoded bare-IP endpoint at http://128.199.122.145/?test12vv36, sending the package name in the query string and disclosing the installer's source IP to the operator of that host. The version number (99.99.99) and package.json shape (dependency on a typosquat name 'requests@^0.3.0' plus a duplicate misspelled 'Dependencies' key) are consistent with a dependency-confusion or proof-of-concept publish rather than a functional library. Installing the package causes unauthenticated, unencrypted outbound network activity to attacker-controlled infrastructure at install time, confirming successful installation on the host.
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 test12vv36@99.99.99.
The versions list below shows the verdict for each recorded version.
- Avoid installing test12vv36@99.99.99. 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.