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
2026-06-012026-06-04
Activity & Reach
Stars
6.3k
Forks
507
Last Push
2026-06-04
today
Commits (4 wk)
426
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
598
Rank Change
▼2
was #95
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
64.9 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
11.7 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
13.3 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
20.0 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
9.1 / 20
Activity Inputs
85.4 / 100
StarsRepository reach
22.8 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
12.6 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
5.7 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
91%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts10
Branch-Protection8
CI-Tests10
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review9
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow10
Dependency-Update-Tool10
Fuzzing0
License9
Maintained10
Packaging-1
Pinned-Dependencies1
SAST0
Security-Policy0
Signed-Releases-1
Token-Permissions0
Vulnerabilities0
Is Materialize safe?
Source-available software. A lower HVTrust score reflects fewer public supply-chain artifacts (open license, build provenance, signed commits) — not a security finding. Materialize may have internal security practices not visible through public signals.
Materialize 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 Materialize publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Materialize. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Materialize have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Materialize has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.7/10. 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 Materialize actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Materialize use?
Materialize ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Materialize's commits signed?
91% of the last 100 commits to Materialize 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 Materialize?
HVTrust scores Materialize 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) · OSSF Scorecard via deps.dev
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v3.1 · Raw JSON
