@codemirror/lang-xml
XML 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 Lezer ecosystem dependency declared for compatibility in this older CodeMirror 0.x package; not a real phantom dep risk. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@codemirror/state | AI (phantom-deps): Same-org @codemirror/state dependency is expected in CodeMirror ecosystem packages; declared for peer compatibility, not a real phantom dep risk. | ai | |
| provenance | no-provenance | AI (provenance): Established CodeMirror package by Marijn Haverbeke; lack of provenance attestation is consistent across the entire CodeMirror ecosystem and not a risk signal here. | ai | |
| phantom-deps | phantom-dep:@lezer/common | AI (phantom-deps): @lezer/common is a legitimate declared dependency in the CodeMirror/Lezer ecosystem; phantom detection is a false positive for config-file references. | ai |
Versions (showing 12 of 12)
| Version | Deps | Published |
|---|---|---|
| 6.1.0 | 6 / 1 | |
| 6.0.2 | 5 / 1 | |
| 6.0.1 | 5 / 1 | |
| 6.0.0 | 5 / 1 | |
| 0.20.0 | 5 / 1 | |
| 0.19.2 | 6 / 1 | |
| 0.19.1 | 6 / 1 | |
| 0.19.0 | 6 / 1 | |
| 0.18.0 | 6 / 6 | |
| 0.17.2 | 6 / 6 | |
| 0.17.1 | 6 / 6 | |
| 0.17.0 | 6 / 6 |
v6.0.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v6.0.1
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
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.
v0.19.2
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. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.19.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Only ~12% of npm packages have provenance, so this is common but not ideal.
v0.18.0
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
v0.17.2
1 finding[Accepted risk] Package was published without Sigstore provenance. Consider requesting the maintainer enable provenance via CI/CD.
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.