Yes! I think an under-considered aspect here is that this kind of high-volume malicious package activity isn’t particularly dangerous in and of itself, but does

Yes! I think an under-considered aspect here is that this kind of high-volume malicious package activity isn’t particularly dangerous in and of itself, but does represent a operational/sustainability risk w/r/t compromising the index’s abilities to respond to actual urgent issues in a timely manner. More automation (reporting, quarantining) goes a long way towards addressing that. It’s more the language of compromise I resent: I think treating every low-effort malicious spam package as a fundamental risk unnecessarily “spends” the security mindshare budget that engineers keep in reserve. But I think my opinions there are already well-known :-)