@codemirror/lang-css
CSS language support for the CodeMirror code editor
Supply chain provenance
Status for the latest visible version.
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
Keywords
Accepted risks
Findings the reviewer chose to accept rather than block on.
| Source | Rule | Reason | Accepted by | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:lezer-tree | AI (phantom-deps): lezer-tree is a legitimate peer/transitive dep in the lezer/CodeMirror ecosystem; phantom detection is a false positive for this package. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@codemirror/autocomplete | AI (phantom-deps): Same-org dependency used indirectly; phantom detection is a false positive for this CodeMirror package. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@codemirror/state | AI (phantom-deps): @codemirror/state is a legitimate declared dependency in the CodeMirror ecosystem; phantom detection is a false positive for this package. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Marijn Haverbeke's CodeMirror packages consistently lack Sigstore provenance; this is a stable characteristic of the publisher, not a risk signal. | ai |
Versions (showing 17 of 17)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 6.3.1 | 5 / 1 | |
| 6.3.0 | 5 / 1 | |
| 6.2.1 | 5 / 1 | |
| 6.2.0 | 5 / 1 | |
| 6.1.1 | 4 / 1 | |
| 6.1.0 | 4 / 1 | |
| 6.0.2 | 4 / 1 | |
| 6.0.1 | 4 / 1 | |
| 6.0.0 | 4 / 1 | |
| 0.20.0 | 4 / 1 | |
| 0.19.3 | 5 / 1 | |
| 0.19.2 | 5 / 1 | |
| 0.19.1 | 5 / 1 | |
| 0.19.0 | 5 / 1 | |
| 0.18.0 | 5 / 3 | |
| 0.17.1 | 6 / 3 | |
| 0.17.0 | 6 / 3 |
v6.3.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v6.3.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v6.2.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v6.2.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v6.1.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v6.1.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v6.0.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v6.0.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v6.0.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.20.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.19.3
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.19.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.19.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.19.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.18.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.17.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.17.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.