Security Issue: Risk of Dependency Confusion with `scancode-workbench`

### Description

I have identified a potential security risk related to a Dependency Confusion vulnerability within our project. Our `package.json` refers to the package named `scancode-workbench`, which, according to our findings, does not exist on the public npm registry. This poses a risk that a malicious package could be uploaded to npm with the same name, leading our build systems to accidentally pull and use the malicious package instead of our intended local or private repository package.

### Affected Package

**Package Name:** `scancode-workbench`
**Current Usage:** Referenced in `package.json` as the project name and included as a dependency.
**Version:** 4.0.3

### Risk Impact

If an attacker were to upload a malicious package to npm under the `scancode-workbench` name with a higher version number, they could execute arbitrary code within our systems or steal sensitive data, depending on how the package is utilized within our projects.
Every single time anyone would use the command npm install pkg name, the malicious package would be fetched. Even in automated pipelines, the higher version number of the malicious package on the public registry would cause a public vs private dependency confusion and might make systems fetch the malicious version of our package.

### Steps to Reproduce

1. Check the npm registry for `scancode-workbench`: [(https://registry.npmjs.org/scancode-workbench)]
2. Observe that the package does not exist on npm, presenting a risk for dependency confusion attacks.

### Proposed Solutions

To mitigate this risk, we have a couple of options:

1. **Claim the Package Name on npm**: By claiming the package name on npm, we can prevent unauthorized parties from uploading a malicious package with the same name. This involves creating a minimal, benign package under the `scancode-workbench` name to reserve it.

2. **Mark the Package as Private**: If the package is intended for internal use only and not meant to be published, we should specify this in our `package.json` by adding `"private": true`. This ensures that npm will refuse to publish it, avoiding any accidental exposure.

Example:
```json
{
"name": "scancode-workbench",
"version": "4.0.3",
"private": true,
"description": "An application for viewing ScanCode results and concluding component origin and license"
}
```

### Action Required

- [ ] Decide on claiming the package name or marking it as private.
- [ ] Implement the chosen solution to secure our package management workflow.

### Additional Information

- Reviewing our internal dependency management policies to avoid similar issues in the future.
- Ensuring all developers are aware of the implications of public vs. private packages in npm.