Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 308 posts

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#241

Post by johannes1234321 »

phiresky wrote: post #68
ashishb wrote: post #58

Here's my `npm` command these days. It reduces the attack surface drastically. alias npm='docker run --rm -it -v ${PWD}:${PWD} --net=host --workdir=${PWD} node:25-bookworm-slim npm' - No access to my env vars - No access to anything outside my current directory (usually a JS project). - No access to my .bashrc or other files. Ref: https://ashishb.net/programming/run-tools-inside-docker/

That seems a bit excessive to sandbox a command that really just downloads arbitrary code you are going to execute immediately afterwards anyways? Also I can recommend pnpm, it has stopped executing lifecycle scripts by default so you can whitelist which ones to run.

> command that really just downloads arbitrary code you are going to execute immediately afterwards anyways?

By default it directly runs code as part of the download.

By isolation there is at least a chance to do some form of review/inspection

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#242

Post by cozzyd »

styanax wrote: post #208
crtasm wrote: post #4

>When you run npm install, npm doesn't just download packages. It executes code. Specifically, it runs lifecycle scripts defined in package.json - preinstall, install, and postinstall hooks. What's the legitimate use case for a package install being allowed to run arbitrary commands on your computer? Quote is from the researchers report https://www.koi.ai/blog/phantomraven-npm-malware-hidden-in-i... edit: I was think…

> What's the legitimate use case for a package install being allowed to run arbitrary commands on your computer? The paradigm itself has been in package managers since DEB and RPM were invented (maybe even Solaris packages before that? it's been a minute since I've Sun'd); it's not the same as NPM, a more direct comparison is the Arch Linux AUR - and the AUR has been attacked to try and inject malware all year (2025)…

Right every library will want to run ldconfig for example.

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#243

Post by pimterry »

brabel wrote: post #179
socalgal2 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's no different anywhere else. I just downloaded jj (rust), it installed 470+ packages When I downloaded wan2gp (python) it installed it install 211 packages.

Oh man you pick the one other language that followed the JavaScript model?! How about C, Java, Go, Lisp, C#, C++, D… and new ones like Odin that are explicitly against package managers for this very reason.

[dead]

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#244

Post by cozzyd »

graemep wrote: post #226
matheusmoreira wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that. The problem is npm allows any random person to upload packages. It's completely untrusted. Contrast that with Linux distributions which have actual maintainers who take responsibility for their packages. They don't generally allow malware to make it into the official software repositories. In many cases they went as far as meeting each other in person just to set up a decen…

Even when random people are allowed to contribute (AUR, PPAs) there seems to be more scrutiny and fewer incidents. Possibly because they are secondary to the main repos and possibly because the people who use them are made aware of the risks. NPM etc. are a bit like Arch would be if everything was in AUR.

With PPAs or COPR (or third party repositories, e.g. slack) you have to explicitly enable each repository too. Even if a repository is enabled by package you are prompted the first time a new repository is used (actually I don't know if that's true when gpgcheck is disabled? If not this would be an easy fix in apt/dnf)

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#245

Post by pluto_modadic »

jwr wrote: post #206

I always wondered why people found it acceptable to just run npm on their systems for anything they do, and have it download anything on any build. Coming from "make" with repeatable and predictable builds, I was appalled that you run this thing and you have no idea what it will download and what it will produce. Could be something different the next time you run it! Who knows! I also found it bizarre that even for t…

makefiles /can/ do whatever you like. They can download anything on build.

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#247

Post by ashishb »

a022311 wrote: post #239
ashishb wrote: post #58

Here's my `npm` command these days. It reduces the attack surface drastically. alias npm='docker run --rm -it -v ${PWD}:${PWD} --net=host --workdir=${PWD} node:25-bookworm-slim npm' - No access to my env vars - No access to anything outside my current directory (usually a JS project). - No access to my .bashrc or other files. Ref: https://ashishb.net/programming/run-tools-inside-docker/

Not sure how secure this really is, because it's fairly easy to break out of a Docker container with the default settings (due to the fact that the kernel is shared between containers and the host, unlike with VMs). Rootless Docker (or better, Podman) would improve security greatly.

Can you show an example of how can a malicious package break out of docker?

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#248

Post by ashishb »

lelanthran wrote: post #154
ashishb wrote: post #58

Here's my `npm` command these days. It reduces the attack surface drastically. alias npm='docker run --rm -it -v ${PWD}:${PWD} --net=host --workdir=${PWD} node:25-bookworm-slim npm' - No access to my env vars - No access to anything outside my current directory (usually a JS project). - No access to my .bashrc or other files. Ref: https://ashishb.net/programming/run-tools-inside-docker/

Won't that still download malicious packages that are dep?

Yeah but those deps won't access your browser cookies and tour secret keys that are outside the current directory.

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#249

Post by nightski »

Havoc wrote: post #220
jwr wrote: post #206

I always wondered why people found it acceptable to just run npm on their systems for anything they do, and have it download anything on any build. Coming from "make" with repeatable and predictable builds, I was appalled that you run this thing and you have no idea what it will download and what it will produce. Could be something different the next time you run it! Who knows! I also found it bizarre that even for t…

The entire Front end dev seems like trust me bro Wild West to me. All feels like endless layers of duct tape. Which I guess in a way it is given the evolution of browsers

I've seen gnarly code everywhere, from kernel drivers to desktop applications to web apps. At the end of the day this describes most of computing imho.

Re: NPM flooded with malicious packages downloaded more than 86k times

#250

Post by ashishb »

silverwind wrote: post #166
ashishb wrote: post #58

Here's my `npm` command these days. It reduces the attack surface drastically. alias npm='docker run --rm -it -v ${PWD}:${PWD} --net=host --workdir=${PWD} node:25-bookworm-slim npm' - No access to my env vars - No access to anything outside my current directory (usually a JS project). - No access to my .bashrc or other files. Ref: https://ashishb.net/programming/run-tools-inside-docker/

This will break native dependencies when the host platform is not the same as the container platform.

My host is Mac OS. My container platform is Linux. Can you share an example where this approach will cause a failure?
Post reply on HN