nanotar (npm) has 1 known vulnerability, the worst rated MODERATE. No malicious-package signal is recorded.
0 direct dependencies
none carry a known advisory
Tracked for PyPI packages. HuggingFace models declare Python dependencies, so npm packages are not covered.
CVSS v3.1 base score out of 10; GitHub rates it MODERATE
chance of exploitation in 30 days, 61st percentile of all CVEs
CyberXYZ composite out of 10
fig. 01 — GHSA-92fh-27vv-894w, the advisory selected below
nanotar through 0.2.0 has a path traversal vulnerability in parseTar() and parseTarGzip() that allows remote attackers to write arbitrary files outside the…
Full advisory text at GitHub advisory or NVD.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CyberXYZ does not call a package safe in absolute terms. It records 1 known vulnerability for nanotar (npm), the worst rated MODERATE, and no malicious-package signal. Whether it is acceptable depends on the version you run.
Yes. CyberXYZ records 1 known vulnerability for nanotar (npm), the worst rated MODERATE. They are GHSA-92fh-27vv-894w.
Search nanotar in CyberXYZ Check at https://cyberxyz.io/check?q=nanotar. The xyz Scanner checks a project's dependencies, and CyberXYZ Proxy checks each package as it is installed.
Checked 2026-11-14 at 10:04 UTC. The most recent advisory here was published 2026-02-11. Updated continuously from NVD, GHSA, OSV and CNA feeds.