Trust signals
Why this verdict
PkgRadar discounts a release’s score when public reputation argues against novel malware. The verdict above already reflects these — the panel just explains what was applied.
- Versions published
- 4
- First published
- Jun 2026
- Publisher
- philpl
Recommended action
Looks clean — keep monitoringNo high-signal indicators in the stored static report. PkgRadar will re-check on the next ingest pass.
Block this release in CIcurl · GitHub Actions
Fail the build when this package version is added or upgraded. Replace $PKGRADAR_TOKEN with a Pro / Team API key from your dashboard.
curl -fsS https://pkgradar.com/gate/npm \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $PKGRADAR_TOKEN" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"specs":["@expo/[email protected]"],"fail_on":"review"}'GitHub Actions step:
- name: PkgRadar gate
run: |
curl -fsS https://pkgradar.com/gate/npm \
-H "Authorization: Bearer ${{ secrets.PKGRADAR_TOKEN }}" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"specs":["@expo/[email protected]"],"fail_on":"review"}'Why flagged
What the scanner saw
No high-signal static finding in the saved report.
Not observed: package install, lifecycle script execution, or sandbox execution. PkgRadar only inspects on-disk artifacts.
Availability ledger
available
Status history (1 event)
- new → available · risk low · score 0 · status changed
Evidence
Static findings
No findings stored for this release.
Manifest
Package metadata
Scripts10
benchvitest benchbuildrollup -c ./scripts/rollup.config.mjschangeset:publishchangeset publishchangeset:versionchangeset version && pnpm install --lockfile-onlychecktsc --noEmitcleanrimraf dist node_modules/.cachepostbuildtsc --lib esnext,dom,dom.iterable --target esnext --module nodenext --moduleResolution nodenext --noEmit ./dist/event-log.d.ts ./dist/expo-event-log-cli.d.tsprebenchpnpm run buildtestvitest testtest:runvitest test --run