How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade D reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Full methodology →
Signals refreshed2026-06-04 18:04 UTC·Repo last pushed yesterday
Activity & Reach
Stars
37.0k
Forks
3.2k
Last Push
2026-06-03
yesterday
Commits (4 wk)
1500
Downloads (7d)
9,082
npm
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
515
Rank Change
NEW
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
37.5 / 100 · 67.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
0.9 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
8.5 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
19.9 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
16.2 / 20
Activity Inputs
93.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
27.4 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.9 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
16.3 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
17%
of last 100 commits verified
Is CodeWhale safe?
Public trust evidence for CodeWhale is thin: several supply-chain signals are missing or weak. This does not mean the project is unsafe — it means an outside observer cannot easily verify the usual integrity checks. Treat with extra scrutiny.
Does CodeWhale publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for CodeWhale. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does CodeWhale have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for CodeWhale. Maintainers can enable the Scorecard GitHub Action to get a public score; without it, automated supply-chain hygiene is harder for outsiders to verify.
Is CodeWhale actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does CodeWhale use?
CodeWhale ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are CodeWhale's commits signed?
17% of the last 100 commits to CodeWhale are verified-signed (GPG, SSH, S/MIME, or GitHub's signing flow). Signed commits help confirm that code was authored by who the commit claims.
Not a safety endorsement. HVTracker describes what public signals show, not whether a project is safe for your use case. Run your own security review before adopting in production.
Runtime trust — coming soon
HVTrust currently scores supply-chain signals. We're adding runtime trust next: what an agent actually does when it runs — what it can reach, which tools it carries, what external services it depends on. Track progress on the roadmap →
MCP support
Tool / plugin surface
External service deps
Package provenance drift
Maintain CodeWhale?
HVTrust scores CodeWhale from public signals only — we never contact maintainers first. If a signal is wrong, stale, or missing (provenance you publish, a Scorecard you run, signed releases), tell us and we'll review it. Corrections are public and tracked on GitHub.
Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · npm Registry (downloads, provenance)
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v3.1 · Raw JSON
