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
49.3k
Forks
8.6k
Last Push
2026-06-04
today
Commits (4 wk)
1000
Downloads (7d)
135,122,245
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
5
Open Issues
3486
Rank Change
▼4
was #33
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
77.1 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
12.6 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
13.7 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
20.0 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
20.0 / 20
Activity Inputs
96.5 / 100
StarsRepository reach
28.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
18.3 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
6.1 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
100%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts0
Branch-Protection5
CI-Tests10
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review10
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow10
Dependency-Update-Tool10
Fuzzing0
License9
Maintained10
Packaging10
Pinned-Dependencies5
SAST7
Security-Policy10
Signed-Releases-1
Token-Permissions0
Vulnerabilities0
Is LiteLLM safe?
Public supply-chain signals for LiteLLM are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but LiteLLM carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does LiteLLM publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for LiteLLM. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does LiteLLM have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
LiteLLM has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 6.1/10. 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 LiteLLM actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does LiteLLM use?
LiteLLM ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are LiteLLM's commits signed?
100% of the last 100 commits to LiteLLM 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.
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 LiteLLM?
HVTrust scores LiteLLM 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.
