SkillTotal

Is @struktoai/mirage-core safe?

No malicious indicators - review capabilities before installing
Notable — review in context (capabilities are not malware):
  • Node.js dynamic code execution
  • Node.js filesystem write/delete
  • Node.js network egress

@struktoai/mirage-core is an AI npm_package analyzed by SkillTotal's deterministic static scanner. The scan found no malicious indicators, though 4 risky constructs are reported for review. It can: delegated authentication, dynamic code execution, filesystem write and network egress — capabilities are what the code can do, not a verdict on intent. Risk score 0/100 (low).

@struktoai/mirage-core 0.0.6

npm_package · npm:@struktoai/mirage-core
LOW
0
/ 100 risk score
Snapshot · scanned Sep 27, 2026 · @struktoai/mirage-core@0.0.6 · engine 0.53.0 / ruleset 60

Automated static-analysis result. It can contain false positives and false negatives, and is not a claim about the intent of @struktoai/mirage-core's authors. Report a false positive.

Capabilities — what this component can do (not a risk score):
delegated authenticationdynamic code executionfilesystem writenetwork egress

Behavioral traits

How this component maps to the CSA agentic threat model. Descriptive — it never affects the risk score.

Execution authority
Tool Access Control / Direct Tool Access
Filesystem reach
Tool Execution Context
Network egress
Interaction & Communication / Direct Communication
Delegated authentication
Tool Execution Context / User Delegated Credentials

Findings (4)

HIGHNode.js dynamic code executionST-DYN-NODE

The code turns strings into live code at runtime (eval / new Function / exec).

eval(code: string, opts?: {
async eval(code, opts = {}) {
eval(code: string, opts?: {
async eval(code, opts = {}) {
_value = eval(compile(_last, '<eval>', 'eval'), _g)
const result = await runWithTimeout(evaluator.eval(source, { inputs: { [CTX_GLOBAL]: ctx } }), timeoutSeconds, label);
return await bound.eval(code, { session: sessionId });

Why it matters: If those strings aren't fixed and trusted, they become a way to run arbitrary code.

Fix: Avoid evaluating dynamically constructed code; if unavoidable, ensure the input is a trusted constant and never derived from external data.

MEDIUMNode.js filesystem write/deleteST-FS-NODE-WRITE

The component writes or deletes files on disk.

fs.writeFile(entry.path, bytes);

Why it matters: Usually legitimate, but worth confirming the paths can't be controlled by untrusted input.

Fix: Confirm which files are written/deleted and that paths cannot be influenced by untrusted input.

MEDIUMNode.js network egressST-NET-NODE

The component makes outbound network requests.

return await this.fetch(method, endpoint, options);
fetch(method, endpoint, options) {
return fetch(url, init).finally(() => {
const response = await fetch(url, init);
const value = await fetch();
resp = await fetch(applyProxy(url), init);
const r = await fetch(buildUrl(url, params), { headers, redirect: 'follow' });
const r = await fetch(url, {
const r = await fetch(url, { headers, redirect: 'follow' });
// can seed a child listing from the same fetch (DirListing.seeds),
listed = await fetch(accessor, match, own);
response = await fetch(url, { method: 'GET', headers, signal: controller.signal });
* the browser-side client knows how to dispatch via fetch().
* the browser-side client knows how to dispatch via fetch().
const resp = await fetch(url);
const resp = await fetch(url, { method: 'HEAD' });
const resp = await fetch(url);
const resp = await fetch(url, {
const resp = await fetch(url, { method: 'DELETE' });
await fetch(url, { method: 'DELETE' });
const resp = await fetch(url, {
return entry.fetch(entry.config, ref);
return fetch(configModel.parse({}), ref);

Why it matters: Usually legitimate, but confirm the destinations are expected and no sensitive data leaves.

Fix: Confirm the destination hosts are expected and that no sensitive data is sent off-host.

LOWDelegated authentication (OAuth 2.0 / OIDC)ST-AUTH-DELEGATED

An OAuth 2.0 / OpenID Connect delegated-authentication flow was detected (authorization-code / refresh-token / token-exchange grant, an OIDC authorize/discovery endpoint or id_token, or a delegation library). Tools authenticate with the end user's delegated, scoped credentials rather than a long-lived embedded service credential. (3 occurrence(s) shown as evidence).

grant_type: 'refresh_token',
grant_type: 'refresh_token',
grant_type: 'refresh_token',

Fix: Delegated auth is a lower-blast-radius execution context than an embedded static credential. Confirm the requested scopes are minimal and that tokens are never logged or forwarded off-host.

Check your own component

Run the same evidence-backed scan on any MCP server, agent skill, or package.

Scan your own component

How we determine this: deterministic static analysis (regex + AST), evidence-anchored, no code execution. Methodology →