The package is not a malware because the evidence presented is insufficient to make that determination. While the evidence points to a lack of trustworthiness due to the low number of versions (Evidence 0), low popularity on GitHub (Evidence 1), and a lack of SLSA provenance, none of these factors definitively indicate malicious intent. These characteristics are common for many legitimate, small, or newly developed open-source projects. The absence of any evidence of malicious code execution, suspicious network activity, or other indicators of compromise is crucial. The low confidence level assigned to the evidence further reinforces the need for more conclusive findings before labeling the package as malware. More robust analysis, such as static and dynamic code analysis, along with LLM-based file analysis (if available), is necessary to identify potential malicious behavior within the package itself. Simply having a low number of versions or a lack of community engagement does not automatically equate to malicious intent.