motive

v0.0.1 suspicious
6.0
Medium Risk

Answer 'why did the agent do that?' with saliency, rationale, and counterfactuals

🤖 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 package
  • Package uploaded less than 24 hours ago (2026-06-05T00:24:42.000Z)
  • Author name is missing or very short
  • Author "" appears to have only 1 package on PyPI (new or inactive account)
  • Package has no PyPI classifiers (low effort / metadata quality)