anti-rea@2.9.2
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "Integrate the antiRea npm library (@dannyphan190/anti-rea) into a host web application to meter dataset access per identity and detect automated abuse: per-identity record budgets that cap bulk extraction and cloning, slow per-identity harvesting, republication of derived data, enumeration walks, and coordinated bot cohorts such as scheduler-driven herds and reconnect storms - including, in shared rooms and communities, seat squatting and vote brigading. Version 2.8.0 adds the combined room guard and an evidence layer: config provenance hashes, verified-neutral identity facts, single-use step-up proofs and evidentiary roles. Version 2.8.1 adds a span gate to the two phase signals: a member counts toward a confirmed cohort only when its observed event span covers at least one full grid period. Version 2.9.0 adds the surface guard - field-level control of what enters and leaves the server - and documents the declared-cohort union budget pattern. Version 2.9.1 adds the ownership probe (BOLA/IDOR sweeps across many owners), the early-minimal occupancy counter to the A1 squat, a machine-readable 402 step-up answer (no settlement), the preference declaration log that pairs with the value watermark, and three calibration utilities (volume rank, EMP-MIX threshold selection, hold-type session features). Version 2.9.2 is a hardening release - input and resource hardening across all modules, property-based tests and a mutation-tested suite (963 tests) - with no new modules and no detector retune. Use when a developer reports bulk scraping, one account quietly draining a dataset, coordinated account groups acting as one machine, or floods of fresh accounts. Every signal is advisory (enforcement: "none") - the host code decides the response, and step-up applies to new actions only." Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Coverage
Static only; nothing was run yet.The label rests on the code, the instruction files and the publisher. The honeypot run replaces this verdict when it completes.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-11-14 and scored it 67/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Summary: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Behavior trace
Queued for honeypot run · static analysis onlyThis version has not been detonated yet. The score above counts behavior as unknown (50/100), so it cannot read Verified until the honeypot run completes and replaces this verdict.
Static findings
No findings across 483 lines in 1 files.
Cost to the agent
Tokens estimated at four characters each. Skills load their instruction text when triggered; the figure is what that costs.
Known vulnerabilities
Vulnerability advisories (OSV) cover npm and PyPI packages; this registry has no advisory database.
What would make this Verified
13 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim dankezo: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.
- New publisher≈ +3 on the totalTime clears this on its own after 14 and 30 days. Claiming the handle (+50) is the fastest way past it.