Cherry Studio
Website
Your AI workspace for models, agents, and productivity.
Is Cherry Studio safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare Cherry Studio
How does it stack up against its UI & App Builders neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: Cherry Studio scores 67.1/100 (Grade B), ranked #454 of 1374 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage C (2 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 6.0/10; 100% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-11-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
What Cherry Studio can reach, and who runs it
Checked 2026-10-09, each with its source. PUBLISHER is the company's or project's own statement, which we haven't verified; CHECKED is something we observed ourselves. These facts describe the product. They don't change its score.
Where your data goes
- PUBLISHER Chat history, settings and API keys are stored on your device, with no cloud sync. Prompts go straight to a model provider you configure yourself; with its built-in model service they pass through Cherry Studio's relay, which it says discards them after each request.
- PUBLISHER It collects aggregated feature usage and anonymised crash logs, which you can switch off under Settings > Data Settings > Privacy Settings. It says it never collects API keys or conversations.
Security practice
- CHECKED Its maintainers have published 4 security advisories, all rated critical, 1 of them in the last 12 months. The repository has a SECURITY.md and GitHub private vulnerability reporting is enabled.
How Cherry Studio could raise its score
Each line changes one public signal and recomputes with the live scoring function. The gains don't add up exactly, because the score is capped near the top.
- Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 6.0 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Fuzzing 0, Pinned-Dependencies 0 +6.2 → 73.3 B · #6 of 18
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Cherry Studio and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the code you run. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.
-
Source Signed
github.com/CherryHQ/cherry-studio, AGPL-3.0, last pushed 2026-11-10. 100% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so changes trace to a verified account.
-
Review and release Mixed
OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 6.0/10 (scanned Oct 10, 2026, refresh pending). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review6
- Branch Protection5
- Signed Releases0
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies0
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 10Branch-Protection 5CI-Tests 9CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review 6Contributors 10Dangerous-Workflow 10Dependency-Update-Tool 10Fuzzing 0License 10Maintained 10Packaging -1Pinned-Dependencies 0SAST 0Security-Policy 10Signed-Releases 0Token-Permissions 0Vulnerabilities 10 -
Published packages None
No registry package. Cherry Studio is used from its repository, so what you run is whatever you check out: pin a release tag or commit.
Changes to this chain
No change to package provenance, package source links, Scorecard coverage or license in HVTracker's daily snapshots of Cherry Studio.
Evidence behind this score
Coverage C: 2 of 5 independent evidence types found.
- GitHub repository data
- Package downloads (missing)
- Supply-chain checks
- Public actions (missing)
- Community mentions (missing)
Verify this score yourself
Every build re-issues Cherry Studio’s score as an Ed25519-signed credential, valid for 7 days. You can check it offline against HVTracker’s published key; if anyone changes a number after signing, verification fails.
What this score doesn’t check
It covers who ships the code, not what the code does. It doesn’t read tool descriptions or prompts for injected instructions, watch runtime behaviour, or find bugs nobody has disclosed yet. For that, run a content scanner before you connect it, such as Cisco MCP Scanner or Snyk Agent Scan.
How Cherry Studio compares in UI & App Builders
- #6 LibreChat 73.1 +6.0
- #7 Odysseus 71.1 +4.0
- #8 Cherry Studio 67.1 this agent
- #9 Pinvou Agent 63.7 −3.4
- #10 Dyad 63.4 −3.7
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Cherry Studio’s 67.1.
Where the 67.1 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the UI & App Builders average
67.1 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceCherry Studio UI & App Builders average (18 agents)
Quick Trust Read
How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade B 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 →
Rank Trend
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
95.7 / 100Common questions about Cherry Studio
Does Cherry Studio publish package provenance?
Does Cherry Studio have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is Cherry Studio actively maintained?
What license does Cherry Studio use?
Are Cherry Studio's commits signed?
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.
Compare Cherry Studio head-to-head
AI agent surface
MCP, providers, tool surface
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 signal live
- External deps live
- Tool / plugin surface live
- Package provenance drift live
Detected changes to Cherry Studio'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.
Maintain Cherry Studio?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores Cherry Studio 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.
Reputation Timeline
Signal history
Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →
For maintainers
[](https://hvtracker.net/agents/cherry-studio)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/cherry-studio"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/cherry-studio.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in UI & App Builders
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON