All d3-color versions

d3-color @2.0.0

rejected
This version was rejected. It did not pass GreenFlagged's security review and is not served by the registry. The findings and risk dispositions below explain why.
100
Risk Score
ISC
License
No
Install Scripts
0
Dependencies
4
Dev Dependencies
14.8 KB
Package Size
Published

Color spaces! RGB, HSL, Cubehelix, Lab and HCL (Lch).

Maintainers

mbostockrecifs

Keywords

d3d3-modulecolorrgbhsllabhcllchcubehelix

Dev Dependencies (4)

PackageConstraintRegistry Status
tape 4 auto_approved
eslint 6 auto_approved
rollup 1 auto_approved
rollup-plugin-terser 5 auto_approved

Changes from v1.4.1

No metadata changes detected.

File Changes

0 added 0 removed 7 modified size delta: +.1 KB

Risk Dispositions (1 applicable to this version, 0 other)

Accepted rules are downgraded to INFO on future analyses; rejected rules escalate to CRITICAL.

Rule Source Disposition Author Reason
osv:GHSA-36jr-mh4h-2g58 osv reject AI AI (osv): HIGH ReDoS advisory affects all versions < 3.1.0; this verdict generalizes to every affected version of d3-color.

SAST Findings (4)

CRITICAL GHSA-36jr-mh4h-2g58: d3-color vulnerable to ReDoS osv

[Always reject] The d3-color module provides representations for various color spaces in the browser. Versions prior to 3.1.0 are vulnerable to a Regular expression Denial of Service. This issue has been patched in version 3.1.0. There are no known workarounds.

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: recifs.

HIGH Publisher changed: mbostock → recifs (on 2020-08-19) provenance

This version was published by a different npm account than previous versions on 2020-08-19. This could indicate a legitimate maintainer transition or an account compromise.

LOW No provenance attestation provenance

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

Review Summary

Risk score: 100 (capped from 103). Findings: 1 critical (+40), 2 high (+50), 1 medium (+10), 1 low (+3).

Published to npm: