npm package report

Is ecstatic safe?

5 known vulnerabilities, worst severity HIGH.

cvss
7.5

how bad it is if exploited, out of 10

epss
not scored

chance of exploitation in the next 30 days

xyz score
4.0

CyberXYZ composite, out of 10

fig. 01 — GHSA-9q64-mpxx-87fg, the advisory selected below

// advisories

GHSA-9q64-mpxx-87fg

HIGH

Versions of ecstatic prior to 4.1.2, 3.3.2 or 2.2.2 are vulnerable to Open Redirect. The package fails to validate redirects, allowing attackers to craft requests that result in an HTTP 301 redirect to any other domains.

Affected
< 2.2.2, >= 4.0.0, < 4.1.2, >= 3.0.0, < 3.3.2
Fixed in
2.2.2
Weakness
CWE-601
Published
2020-04-01
Source
github

GHSAreferencereference

// dependencies

0 direct

Sign in for dependency paths and remediation

// ai model usage

Tracked for PyPI packages. HuggingFace models declare Python dependencies, so npm packages are not covered.

Checked 2026-09-22 at 03:29 UTC. The most recent advisory here was published 2020-12-15. Updated continuously from NVD, GHSA, OSV and CNA feeds.

Think a verdict here is wrong? Tell us — we respond within 2 business days.
Is ecstatic safe? npm package security report | CyberXYZ