How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade B 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 today
Rank Trend
2026-05-232026-06-04
Activity & Reach
Stars
143.9k
Forks
22.6k
Last Push
2026-06-04
today
Commits (4 wk)
623
Downloads (7d)
19,172,902
docker+pypi
HN mentions (30d)
451
Open Issues
720
Rank Change
▼2
was #32
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
77.9 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
13.1 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
14.0 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
20.0 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
20.0 / 20
Activity Inputs
100.0 / 100
StarsRepository reach
30 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
20 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
6.5 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
100%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts10
Branch-Protection1
CI-Tests10
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review10
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow10
Dependency-Update-Tool10
Fuzzing0
License9
Maintained10
Packaging10
Pinned-Dependencies7
SAST3
Security-Policy10
Signed-Releases-1
Token-Permissions0
Vulnerabilities0
Is Dify safe?
Source-available software. A lower HVTrust score reflects fewer public supply-chain artifacts (open license, build provenance, signed commits) — not a security finding. Dify may have internal security practices not visible through public signals.
Public supply-chain signals for Dify are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but Dify carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does Dify publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Dify. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Dify have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Dify has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 6.5/10. 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 Dify actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Dify use?
Dify ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Dify's commits signed?
100% of the last 100 commits to Dify 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 Dify?
HVTrust scores Dify 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.
