AI Analysis
Final verdict: SUSPICIOUS
The package has minimal risks associated with network, shell, and obfuscation activities but raises concerns due to its lack of maintainer history and essential metadata.
- Metadata risk is high due to the absence of essential metadata like author information.
- The package is newly released with no prior maintainer history.
Per-check LLM notes
- Network: No network calls detected, which is normal for a library focused on local authentication actions.
- Shell: No shell execution patterns detected, aligning with expectations for a pure Python SDK.
- Obfuscation: No obfuscation patterns detected, indicating low risk.
- Credentials: No credential harvesting patterns detected, indicating low risk.
- Metadata: The package is brand new with no maintainer history and lacks essential metadata such as an author name, raising suspicion.
Heuristic Checks
Outbound Network Calls
No suspicious network call patterns found
Code Obfuscation
No obfuscation patterns detected
Shell / Subprocess Execution
No shell execution patterns detected
Credential Harvesting
No credential harvesting patterns detected
Typosquatting
No typosquatting candidates detected
Registered Email Domain
No author email provided
Suspicious Page Links
All external links appear legitimate
Git Repository History
No GitHub repository linked
No GitHub repository link found
Maintainer History
score 10.0
5 maintainer concern(s) found
Only one version has ever been released — brand new packagePackage uploaded less than 24 hours ago (2026-06-04T22:13:45.000Z)Author name is missing or very shortAuthor "" appears to have only 1 package on PyPI (new or inactive account)Package has no PyPI classifiers (low effort / metadata quality)
💬 Discussion Feed
No discussion yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
Report Abuse / Security Issue