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 18:04 UTC·Repo last pushed 18 days ago
Rank Trend
2026-05-232026-06-04
Activity & Reach
Stars
63.8k
Forks
5.5k
Last Push
2026-05-17
18 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
1
Downloads (7d)
40,019
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
0
Open Issues
332
Rank Change
▼21
was #90
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
62.8 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
9.0 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
13.3 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
12.0 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
17.7 / 20
Activity Inputs
72.6 / 100
StarsRepository reach
28.8 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
22.5 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
3.8 / 25
CommunityFork signal
17.4 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
5.6 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
41%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts10
Branch-Protection3
CI-Tests0
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review10
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow10
Dependency-Update-Tool0
Fuzzing0
License10
Maintained10
Packaging-1
Pinned-Dependencies0
SAST0
Security-Policy10
Signed-Releases-1
Token-Permissions0
Vulnerabilities10
Is Open Interpreter safe?
Open Interpreter 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 Open Interpreter publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Open Interpreter. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Open Interpreter have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Open Interpreter has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.6/10. 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 Open Interpreter actively maintained?
Maintained. Last push was 18 days ago.
What license does Open Interpreter use?
Open Interpreter ships under AGPL-3.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Open Interpreter's commits signed?
41% of the last 100 commits to Open Interpreter 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 Open Interpreter?
HVTrust scores Open Interpreter 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.
