How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade C reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Full methodology →
Signals refreshed2026-06-04 20:15 UTC·Repo last pushed today
Rank Trend
2026-05-242026-06-04
Activity & Reach
Stars
17.6k
Forks
1.1k
Last Push
2026-06-04
today
Commits (4 wk)
258
Downloads (7d)
9,982
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
339
Rank Change
▼9
was #91
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
64.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
7.3 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
10.9 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
20.0 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
15.5 / 20
Activity Inputs
89.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
25.5 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
14.2 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
2.8 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
75%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts8
Branch-Protection5
CI-Tests10
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review0
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow0
Dependency-Update-Tool0
Fuzzing0
License10
Maintained10
Packaging10
Pinned-Dependencies0
SAST0
Security-Policy0
Signed-Releases0
Token-Permissions0
Vulnerabilities0
Is Cua safe?
Cua has a mixed signal profile. Some trust indicators are present, others are missing. Whether it is safe for your use case depends on which gaps matter to you — review the breakdown below before adopting in production.
Does Cua publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Cua. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Cua have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Cua has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 2.8/10. The Scorecard checks for branch protection, signed releases, dependency updates, fuzzing, code review, and other supply-chain hygiene items. See the full check breakdown on this page.
Is Cua actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Cua use?
Cua ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Cua's commits signed?
75% of the last 100 commits to Cua 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 Cua?
HVTrust scores Cua 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.
