AI Analysis
Final verdict: SUSPICIOUS
The package shows low risks in terms of network usage, shell execution, obfuscation, and credential handling. However, its metadata risk score is high due to the absence of maintainer history and author details, making it suspicious and potentially indicative of a supply-chain attack.
- High metadata risk due to lack of maintainer history and author details
- Otherwise, minimal observable risks
Per-check LLM notes
- Network: No network calls detected, which is normal unless the package's functionality requires external communication.
- Shell: No shell executions detected, indicating no direct system command execution by the package.
- Obfuscation: No obfuscation patterns detected, indicating low risk of malicious intent.
- Credentials: No credential harvesting patterns detected, suggesting safe handling of sensitive information.
- Metadata: The package is brand new with no maintainer history and lacks author details, 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 (2026-06-05T00:24:42.000Z)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