devDeps: ethjs-query@^0.3.8 -> @metamask/ethjs-query@^0.7.0

[legobeat]

No description provided.

[socket-security]

New and removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

Packages	Version	New capabilities	Transitives	Size	Publisher
@metamask/ethjs-query	0.7.0	None	+7	2.19 MB	lgbot
@babel/runtime	7.23.2	None	+1	275 kB	nicolo-ribaudo

🚮 Removed packages: [email protected]

[socket-security]

🚨 Potential security issues detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

To accept the risk, merge this PR and you will not be notified again.

Issue	Package	Version	Note	Source
Unstable ownership	@metamask/ethjs-query	0.7.0	Author: lgbot	package.json

Next steps

What is unstable ownership?

A new collaborator has begun publishing package versions. Package stability and security risk may be elevated.

Try to reduce the amount of authors you depend on to reduce the risk to malicious actors gaining access to your supply chain. Packages should remove inactive collaborators with publishing rights from packages on npm.

Take a deeper look at the dependency

Take a moment to review the security alert above. Review the linked package source code to understand the potential risk. Ensure the package is not malicious before proceeding. If you're unsure how to proceed, reach out to your security team or ask the Socket team for help at support [AT] socket [DOT] dev.

Remove the package

If you happen to install a dependency that Socket reports as Known Malware you should immediately remove it and select a different dependency. For other alert types, you may may wish to investigate alternative packages or consider if there are other ways to mitigate the specific risk posed by the dependency.

Mark a package as acceptable risk

To ignore an alert, reply with a comment starting with @SocketSecurity ignore followed by a space separated list of package-name@version specifiers. e.g. @SocketSecurity ignore [email protected] bar@* or ignore all packages with @SocketSecurity ignore-all

• @SocketSecurity ignore @metamask/[email protected]

[mcmire]

I don't think we need to do this; I think we can just drop ethjs-query altogether. See: #128

[legobeat]

I don't think we need to do this; I think we can just drop ethjs-query altogether. See: #128

Does that mean that ethjs-query compatibility is not actually needed to be preserved or guaranteed for this module?

[mcmire]

@legobeat Yes, exactly.