Loading the registry…
A TypeScript library for redacting sensitive information from objects by matching property names
Cursor Rules are .cursorrules / .cursor/rules files that steer Cursor's AI; scanned with the same pipeline.
We found this by crawling public sources and nobody has attested to it. That is how most of the registry gets here, and it is not a mark against the artifact — it only means no authenticated act of publication is on record. An artifact can be the vendor's own and still appear here.
This artifact ships from 2 sources and their verdicts differ. The worst is github (Flagged). Installing from a cleaner source does not mean the others are safe — check the source you actually install from.
github: https://github.com/cyb3rsyph0n/redact-it, 28 findings
Cursor Rules are .cursorrules / .cursor/rules files that steer Cursor's AI. Review the scanned source before copying them into your own project.
nerlo install -- @nurv-llc/redact-it
6 of 11 scanners examined this package. The rest do not apply to it — language, ecosystem and packaging decide which analyzers can say anything, and a scanner that cannot examine an artifact reports nothing rather than passing it.
v1.4.0
0 findings · 0.8s
v2.0.11
12 findings · 8.0s
v0.3.74
2 findings · 1.7s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 4.3s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 4.3s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 8.4s
vv0.3.2
No Go packages were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.1s
No report in this scan: govulncheck, osv-scanner, trivy, trivy_image.
1 scan on record. Every scan's full results are retained immutably for 24 months.
| Completed | Composite | Change | Scanners | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2026 | Scan Halted | — | agentshield: completecisco-skill-scanner: completeagent-audit-kit: completenerlo-behavioral: completenerlo-install-instruction: completecapslock ·n/a: not applicablenerlo-multi-source: complete | rejected |
Findings in files this artifact installs stand as reported; a model re-read the rest and said which ones it believes are false positives. This is a second opinion published beside the evidence, not a correction to it: the per-scanner reports above are unchanged, every dismissed finding is still listed there at its original severity, and the score and the Flagged badge are computed from those raw severities alone. Nothing below moved them.
Out of 14 findings across every scanner that examined this package.
Two keys had to turn. The model had to name a reason from a fixed list of six, and a deterministic check of ours — over which files this artifact actually installs — had to independently agree. Anything it could not corroborate is in “not reviewed” above, at full severity.
6 Documentation or example — The match is in documentation or sample code, confirmed by our own check to be outside the installed artifact.
Rules: SOCIAL_ENG_VAGUE_DESCRIPTION, MANIFEST_MISSING_LICENSE, MANIFEST_INVALID_NAME · Files: /repo/.github/SKILL.md, /repo/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/SKILL.md · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
1 CI or editor configuration — The match is in build, CI or editor configuration, confirmed by our own check to be outside the installed artifact.
Rules: AAK-GHA-IMMUTABLE-001 · Files: .github/workflows/ci.yml · reported by agent-audit-kit
These findings are in files this artifact installs and are not placeholder values. No false-positive basis can be corroborated for such a finding, so this review never dismisses one; they were not sent to the model and stand at their scanner's severity.
3 HIDDEN_DATA_FILE
Files: /repo/.aider.conf.yml, /repo/.prettierrc.json, /repo/.windsurfrules · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
1 AAK-SUPPLY-005
Files: package-lock.json · reported by agent-audit-kit
1 LOW_ANALYZABILITY
Files: /repo · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
1 MANIFEST_MISSING_LICENSE
Files: /repo/SKILL.md · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
1 SOCIAL_ENG_VAGUE_DESCRIPTION
Files: /repo/SKILL.md · reported by cisco-skill-scanner
Artifact code is difficult to analyze, obscuring potential risks.
The artifact's installed code exhibits low analyzability, making it challenging to fully understand its behavior and capabilities. This difficulty in analysis means that potential risks, such as network egress, shell execution, credential access, or file writes, cannot be readily identified or ruled out. The `LOW_ANALYZABILITY` finding warrants attention as it impacts the ability to assess the artifact's security posture.
Concern level assessed by the review: High. This is the review's scale, not the registry badge.
Reviewed by gemini-2.5-flash. The model sees the findings, not your code, and cannot change a score.