Code obfuscation is widely adopted in modern software development to protect intellectual property and hinder reverse engineering, but it also provides attackers with a powerful means to conceal malicious logic inside otherwise legitimate JavaScript code. In a software supply chain where a single compromised package can affect thousands of applications, this raises a critical question: how robust are the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) tools that CI/CD pipelines rely on as automated security gatekeepers? This paper answers that question by empirically quantifying the impact of JavaScript obfuscation on state-of-practice SAST. We define a realistic supply-chain threat model in which an adversary injects vulnerable code and iteratively obfuscates it until the pipeline reports a clean scan. To measure the resulting degradation, we introduce the Vulnerability Detection Loss (VDL) metric and conduct a two-phase study. First, we analyze 16 vulnerable-by-design Node.js web applications from the OWASP directory; second, we extend the analysis to 260 in-the-wild JavaScript/Node.js projects from GitHub. Across both datasets, we apply eight semantics-preserving obfuscation techniques and their combinations and evaluate two representative SAST tools, Njsscan and Bearer. Even a single obfuscation technique typically suppresses most baseline findings, including high-severity issues, while stacking techniques yield near-total evasion, with VDL often approaching 100%. Our results show that current JavaScript SAST is fundamentally not robust against commonplace obfuscations and that "clean" reports on obfuscated code may offer only a false sense of security. Finally, we discuss practical mitigation guidelines and directions for obfuscation-aware analysis.

翻译：暂无翻译