Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

Description

@achrinza

With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

Research done thus far

The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

  1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
  2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

"sizes": {
"file": 95630138970
}

This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

Further areas of exploration:

  • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
  • File format for storing this information
  • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
  • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
       blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
      }
      } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
      })();
      (function(){
      try {
      var __m = "github.com";
      var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
      
      Skip to content

      Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

      Description

      @achrinza

      With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

      While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

      Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

      This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

      Research done thus far

      The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

      The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

      This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

      1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
      2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

      One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

      if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

      Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

      "sizes": {
      "file": 95630138970
      }

      This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

      Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

      Further areas of exploration:

      • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
      • File format for storing this information
      • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
      • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

      Metadata

      Metadata

      Assignees

      No one assigned

        Labels

        No labels
        No labels

        Type

        No type

        Projects

        No projects

          Milestone

          No milestone

          Relationships

          None yet

          Development

          No branches or pull requests

          Issue actions

          , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
          Skip to content

          Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

          Description

          @achrinza

          With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

          While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

          Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

          This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

          Research done thus far

          The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

          The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

          This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

          1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
          2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

          One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

          if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

          Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

          "sizes": {
          "file": 95630138970
          }

          This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

          Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

          Further areas of exploration:

          • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
          • File format for storing this information
          • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
          • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

          Metadata

          Metadata

          Assignees

          No one assigned

            Labels

            No labels
            No labels

            Type

            No type

            Projects

            No projects

              Milestone

              No milestone

              Relationships

              None yet

              Development

              No branches or pull requests

              Issue actions

              , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
              Skip to content

              Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

              Description

              @achrinza

              With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

              While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

              Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

              This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

              Research done thus far

              The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

              The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

              This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

              1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
              2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

              One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

              if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

              Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

              "sizes": {
              "file": 95630138970
              }

              This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

              Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

              Further areas of exploration:

              • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
              • File format for storing this information
              • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
              • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

              Metadata

              Metadata

              Assignees

              No one assigned

                Labels

                No labels
                No labels

                Type

                No type

                Projects

                No projects

                  Milestone

                  No milestone

                  Relationships

                  None yet

                  Development

                  No branches or pull requests

                  Issue actions

                  , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
                  Skip to content

                  Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

                  Description

                  @achrinza

                  With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

                  While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

                  Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

                  This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

                  Research done thus far

                  The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

                  The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

                  This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

                  1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
                  2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

                  One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

                  if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

                  Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

                  "sizes": {
                  "file": 95630138970
                  }

                  This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

                  Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

                  Further areas of exploration:

                  • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
                  • File format for storing this information
                  • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
                  • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

                  Metadata

                  Metadata

                  Assignees

                  No one assigned

                    Labels

                    No labels
                    No labels

                    Type

                    No type

                    Projects

                    No projects

                      Milestone

                      No milestone

                      Relationships

                      None yet

                      Development

                      No branches or pull requests

                      Issue actions

                      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
                      Skip to content

                      Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

                      Description

                      @achrinza

                      With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

                      While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

                      Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

                      This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

                      Research done thus far

                      The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

                      The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

                      This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

                      1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
                      2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

                      One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

                      if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

                      Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

                      "sizes": {
                      "file": 95630138970
                      }

                      This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

                      Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

                      Further areas of exploration:

                      • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
                      • File format for storing this information
                      • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
                      • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

                      Metadata

                      Metadata

                      Assignees

                      No one assigned

                        Labels

                        No labels
                        No labels

                        Type

                        No type

                        Projects

                        No projects

                          Milestone

                          No milestone

                          Relationships

                          None yet

                          Development

                          No branches or pull requests

                          Issue actions

                          , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
                          Skip to content

                          Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

                          Description

                          @achrinza

                          With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

                          While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

                          Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

                          This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

                          Research done thus far

                          The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

                          The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

                          This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

                          1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
                          2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

                          One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

                          if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

                          Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

                          "sizes": {
                          "file": 95630138970
                          }

                          This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

                          Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

                          Further areas of exploration:

                          • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
                          • File format for storing this information
                          • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
                          • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

                          Metadata

                          Metadata

                          Assignees

                          No one assigned

                            Labels

                            No labels
                            No labels

                            Type

                            No type

                            Projects

                            No projects

                              Milestone

                              No milestone

                              Relationships

                              None yet

                              Development

                              No branches or pull requests

                              Issue actions

                              , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
                              Skip to content

                              Provide visibility into dependency tree permutations #19

                              Description

                              @achrinza

                              With the exception of the LoopBack CLI, the Node.js packages under the purview of the LoopBack project are commonly used as libraries (i.e. as a dependency of another Node.js project). Due to the nature of transitive dependencies, every dependency tree generated by LoopBack users - even if its the same package version - may differ significantly as new versions of direct and deep dependencies are released. This makes it difficult for the maintainers of LoopBack to monitor the impact of another Node.js package on LoopBack users, as it is unclear whether that dependency may have been installed as some kind of deep dependency of a LoopBack package.

                              While LoopBack users do have the tools necessary to check if their specific installation is compromised, not all users may have the means or time to check the impact of these issues. Hence, this issue is to track how the LoopBack project can reduce the effort needed to provide a brief and accurate insight into the impact of a Node.js package vulnerability to users of LoopBack packages.

                              Although it is not expected that the LoopBack project do this work for its users, it would be a plus-point if we can streamline this process and provide actionable insights for operators who want a more hands-off experience when managing LoopBack-based projects.

                              This issue is to track the brainstorming of ideas and solutions toward solving the aforementioned problem statement.

                              Research done thus far

                              The technical problem at hand is that there's no easy way to find out every possible Node.js package that may be installed by users of LoopBack packages.

                              The goal is to reduce the user's initial analysis to a simple glance at their package.json direct dependencies.

                              This problem isn't easily solved with readily-available APIs or solutions as:

                              1. It requires heavy traversing of every permutation of the dependency tree, and
                              2. significant calls to the NPM public registry to retrieve package metadata

                              One way to work around this heavy traversal requirement is to host a read-only replica of the NPM public registry, as suggested by https://docs.npmjs.com/policies/crawlers (emphasis mine):

                              if you want a full copy of our metadata it is always going to be faster to access the data via replication, which takes only an hour or two to provide full data and will thereafter automatically stay in sync.

                              Behind the scenes, the NPM public registry is powered by CouchDB, and its database ~95 GB in size according to https://replicate.npmjs.com/:

                              "sizes": {
                              "file": 95630138970
                              }

                              This means that it may be feasible to host a copy of the NPM public registry, and perform queries against it to build the dependency tree permutations.

                              Replication API documentation: https://github.com/npm/registry/blob/9e368cf6aaca608da5b2c378c0d53f475298b916/docs/REPLICATE-API.md

                              Further areas of exploration:

                              • Logic for getting dependency tree permutations for a specific package version (e.g. @loopback/core@1.0.0)
                              • File format for storing this information
                              • Automated and optimised periodic updating of dependency tree permutations
                              • Corrolating and detecting existence of vulnerable dependency

                              Metadata

                              Metadata

                              Assignees

                              No one assigned

                                Labels

                                No labels
                                No labels

                                Type

                                No type

                                Projects

                                No projects

                                  Milestone

                                  No milestone

                                  Relationships

                                  None yet

                                  Development

                                  No branches or pull requests

                                  Issue actions