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 10 days ago
Rank Trend
2026-05-252026-06-04
Activity & Reach
Stars
774
Forks
100
Last Push
2026-05-25
10 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
1
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
617
Open Issues
14
Rank Change
▼6
was #160
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
43.4 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
3.3 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
9.9 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
12.5 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
6.9 / 20
Activity Inputs
54.0 / 100
StarsRepository reach
17.3 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
23.6 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
3.8 / 25
CommunityFork signal
9.3 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
1.6 / 10
via deps.dev · OpenSSF
Signed Commits
27%
of last 100 commits verified
Binary-Artifacts10
Branch-Protection0
CI-Tests0
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review0
Contributors0
Dangerous-Workflow-1
Dependency-Update-Tool0
Fuzzing0
License10
Maintained0
Packaging-1
Pinned-Dependencies-1
SAST0
Security-Policy0
Signed-Releases0
Token-Permissions-1
Vulnerabilities3
Is OpenCUA safe?
Public trust evidence for OpenCUA 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 OpenCUA publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for OpenCUA. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does OpenCUA have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
OpenCUA has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 1.6/10. 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 OpenCUA actively maintained?
Maintained. Last push was 10 days ago.
What license does OpenCUA use?
OpenCUA ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are OpenCUA's commits signed?
26% of the last 100 commits to OpenCUA 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 OpenCUA?
HVTrust scores OpenCUA 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
