Is Activepieces safe?
Activepieces scores 40.9/100 (Grade D), ranked #281 of 328 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage C (2 of 5 independent signal types).
The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found;
no OSSF Scorecard result yet;
98% of recent commits are signed;
last pushed 2026-07-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
Quick Trust Read
Verdict
Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.
40.9/100 · Grade D
Strongest Signal
Maintenance
19.9/20
Weakest Signal
Safety / Integrity
4.9/25
What Would Improve It
Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.
Recent Changes
2026-07-04
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Amazon Bedrock
2026-06-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 31 spots (#241 → #272)
2026-06-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 17 spots (#224 → #241)
Maintainer Checklist
Add Scorecard coverageExpose the repository to OpenSSF Scorecard checks so supply-chain posture is easier to verify.
Publish provenanceAdd package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.
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. Evidence coverage C is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (2 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →
Signals refreshed2026-07-11 04:00 UTC·Repo last pushed yesterday
Rank Trend
2026-07-052026-07-11
Activity & Reach
Stars
23.2k
Forks
3.9k
Last Push
2026-07-10
yesterday
Commits (4 wk)
281
Downloads (7d)
1,452,097
npm
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
351
Rank Change
=
was #281
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
40.9 / 100 · 67.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
4.9 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
8.5 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
19.9 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
18.7 / 20
Activity Inputs
92.9 / 100
StarsRepository reach
26.2 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.9 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
16.7 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
98%
of last 100 commits verified
Is Activepieces safe?
Public trust evidence for Activepieces 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 Activepieces publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Activepieces. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Activepieces have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for Activepieces. Maintainers can enable the Scorecard GitHub Action to get a public score; without it, automated supply-chain hygiene is harder for outsiders to verify.
Is Activepieces actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Activepieces use?
Activepieces ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Activepieces's commits signed?
98% of the last 100 commits to Activepieces 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.
These runtime-trust fields — detected from public repo docs and manifests — contribute a bounded adjustment to this project's HVTrust score alongside supply-chain evidence. The exact values each field can add or subtract are documented in the methodology → Compare this surface across every listed agent in the capability matrix →
MCP Server Support
high confidence
Implemented
Activepieces appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Credential signal:
No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
browser
code
database
filesystem
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
low confidence
Unknown
Package source metadata is missing or inconclusive
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live
How this surface has changed
Detected changes to Activepieces's runtime surface and supply-chain posture, from daily public-signal snapshots. A change here means our detectors see something different — a genuinely changed capability, or better evidence of an existing one.
2026-07-04
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Amazon Bedrock
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
Maintain Activepieces?
HVTrust scores Activepieces 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) · npm Registry (downloads, provenance)
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.2 · Raw JSON
