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 16:07 UTC·Repo last pushed 48 days ago
Rank Trend
2026-05-232026-06-04
Activity & Reach
Stars
33.7k
Forks
3.5k
Last Push
2026-04-17
48 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
15
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
0
Open Issues
248
Rank Change
▼12
was #151
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
45.9 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
3.2 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
10.6 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
8.8 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
12.5 / 20
Activity Inputs
62.0 / 100
StarsRepository reach
27.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
18.3 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
16.5 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
2.5 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
1%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts10
Branch-Protection0
CI-Tests-1
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review0
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow10
Dependency-Update-Tool0
Fuzzing0
License9
Maintained0
Packaging-1
Pinned-Dependencies0
SAST0
Security-Policy0
Signed-Releases-1
Token-Permissions0
Vulnerabilities0
Is GPT Pilot safe?
Source-available software. A lower HVTrust score reflects fewer public supply-chain artifacts (open license, build provenance, signed commits) — not a security finding. GPT Pilot may have internal security practices not visible through public signals.
Public trust evidence for GPT Pilot 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 GPT Pilot publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for GPT Pilot. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does GPT Pilot have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
GPT Pilot has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 2.5/10. 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 GPT Pilot actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 48 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does GPT Pilot use?
GPT Pilot ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are GPT Pilot's commits signed?
1% of the last 100 commits to GPT Pilot 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 GPT Pilot?
HVTrust scores GPT Pilot 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.
