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 20:15 UTC·Repo last pushed 31 days ago
Rank Trend
2026-05-252026-06-04
Activity & Reach
Stars
1.9k
Forks
328
Last Push
2026-05-04
31 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
0
Open Issues
25
Rank Change
▼7
was #182
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
34.8 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
4.2 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
2.0 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
9.9 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
7.9 / 20
Activity Inputs
52.2 / 100
StarsRepository reach
19.7 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
20.7 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
11.7 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
2.4 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
23%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts10
Branch-Protection5
CI-Tests0
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review4
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow-1
Dependency-Update-Tool0
Fuzzing0
License0
Maintained0
Packaging-1
Pinned-Dependencies-1
SAST0
Security-Policy0
Signed-Releases-1
Token-Permissions-1
Vulnerabilities0
Is Open Operator safe?
Public trust evidence for Open Operator 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 Open Operator publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Open Operator. 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 Operator have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Open Operator has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 2.4/10. 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 Operator actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 31 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does Open Operator use?
Open Operator ships under no SPDX license detected. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Open Operator's commits signed?
23% of the last 100 commits to Open Operator 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 Operator?
HVTrust scores Open Operator 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 · Algolia HN Search API
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v3.1 · Raw JSON
