The package is not a malware because the evidence presented is insufficient to make that determination. While the evidence points to a lack of popularity and a small number of versions (Evidence 0 and 1), these are not definitive indicators of malicious intent. Low popularity and few versions could simply indicate a niche package or one that is relatively new and not yet widely adopted. The absence of stronger evidence, such as suspicious code behavior (no LLM analysis provided), YARA rule matches (explicitly stated as unreliable), or any indication of malicious functionality within the package itself, prevents a conclusive classification as malware. The low OpenSSF score mentioned in Evidence 1 is a concern, but without further details on the scoring methodology and the specific vulnerabilities identified, this remains a weak indicator. More comprehensive analysis, including static and dynamic code analysis, is necessary to definitively assess the package's safety.