← Home

@autosoft/jest-preset

A base to easily run Jest with SWC.

6
Versions
MIT
License
No
Install Scripts
Missing
Provenance

Supply chain provenance

Status for the latest visible version.

No SLSA provenance npm registry signatures No source commit

Without SLSA provenance there is no cryptographic link between this tarball and the public source — the axios compromise (March 2026) relied on exactly this gap.

Maintainers

bconnorwhite

Keywords

jestpresettestingtestunitautoautosoftautoreposwcconfig

Accepted risks

Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.

SourceRuleReasonAccepted byWhen
provenance missing-githead AI (provenance): Established publisher with strong track record; package content is trivially auditable (single JSON config file). Missing gitHead is a minor CI environment change, not a risk signal for this package. ai
provenance no-provenance AI (provenance): Package is a minimal JSON config preset from a trusted publisher. Lack of Sigstore attestation is not a meaningful risk given the package's simplicity and publisher history. ai
phantom-deps phantom-dep:jest AI (phantom-deps): Jest preset packages declare jest as a dependency for consumers to install; it is referenced in config, not imported directly. This is the expected pattern for a preset. ai
phantom-deps phantom-dep:@swc/core AI (phantom-deps): @swc/core is a runtime dependency declared for consumers; referenced in jest-preset.json config, not imported in JS. Normal for a preset package. ai
phantom-deps phantom-dep:@swc/jest AI (phantom-deps): @swc/jest is a runtime dependency declared for consumers; referenced in jest-preset.json config, not imported in JS. Normal for a preset package. ai

Versions (showing 6 of 6)

Version Deps Published
1.0.5 3 / 1
1.0.4 3 / 1
1.0.3 3 / 1
1.0.2 3 / 1
1.0.1 3 / 1
1.0.0 3 / 0

v1.0.5

2 findings
HIGH Missing gitHead — previous versions had it provenance

This version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: bconnorwhite.

LOW No provenance attestation provenance

Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.

v1.0.4

2 findings
INFO No provenance attestation provenance

[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.

INFO Missing gitHead — previous versions had it provenance

[Accepted risk] This version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: bconnorwhite.

v1.0.3

2 findings
HIGH Missing gitHead — previous versions had it provenance

This version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: bconnorwhite.

LOW No provenance attestation provenance

Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.

v1.0.2

2 findings
INFO No provenance attestation provenance

[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.

INFO Missing gitHead — previous versions had it provenance

[Accepted risk] This version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: bconnorwhite.

v1.0.1

2 findings
INFO No provenance attestation provenance

[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.

INFO Missing gitHead — previous versions had it provenance

[Accepted risk] This version has no gitHead field linking it to a source commit, but previous versions did. This suggests the publish environment changed. Published by: bconnorwhite.

v1.0.0

1 finding
INFO No provenance attestation provenance

[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.