Future of Package Updates on NPM #1292
Replies: 4 comments 5 replies
-
but wouldn't taking it off of npm fuel the fire either way, as the official copy wouldn't be available on npm, thus allowing for more impersonations of the package, and people could just reupload versions of the github downloadables onto npm that could have critical backdoors?
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Don't think you should stop updating on NPM. Other packages have had the same problem with people creating fake copies with included malware and distributing it with a similar name, it is just something that happens unfortunately. Users just need to be more vigilant and ensure they are installing the correct package. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I believe it would be better to change the package name, such as replacing 'selfbot' with another term. Some users mistakenly think this is a traditional selfbot that they can simply install and start using. I'm considering alternatives like 'discord.js-auto-v13' or 'discord.js-user-v13. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
this package is awesome please keep going |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I am considering no longer updating and publishing this package on NPM.
The reason is that this package has been frequently impersonated to insert malicious code aimed at stealing user tokens.
Additionally, the package name is somewhat sensitive (a selfbot package).
Should I proceed with this plan? Users would then update the package via GitHub (which is more difficult) or continue updating through NPM (with a more noticeable warning).
I will keep this question open from version 3.4.0 until just before version 3.5.0 is released. In the meantime, I will still update patches on NPM.
Ref: #1237
187 votes ·
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions