cue-paper-study-cn@0.2.28
CAUTIONPublisher claims: "学术论文研读包:给你一篇 PDF/链接,产出五段研读卡——观点逐句挂页码锚、复现清单(数据/代码/参数缺口如实标)、引用网络只列检索到的、综述脚手架留你自己的论点槽。适合「这篇论文讲什么」「帮我读这篇 PDF」「综述取材」「引用对不对」等场景。Do NOT use for: 代写或降重改写论文、编造不存在的引文与结论、替你做学术评价。Triggers: 论文研读 / 读这篇 PDF / 文献速览 / 综述骨架 / 引用核对 / 复现清单; paper reading / literature review scaffold" Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-11-02 and scored it 66/100 (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 other findings across 1,668 lines in 12 files.
What would make this Verified
14 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim huhoo: 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.
- Python subprocess execution detected≈ +2 on the totalBuild commands from fixed arguments, never from interpolated strings; prefer an API client over shelling out.