Is Codebase Memory MCP safe?
Codebase Memory MCP scores 90.4/100 (Grade A), ranked #8 of 417 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types).
The public evidence: its packages ship with cryptographic provenance;
OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 7.7/10;
30% of recent commits are signed;
last pushed 2026-07-14. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
Quick Trust Read
Verdict
Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.
90.4/100 · Grade A
Strongest Signal
Identity / Provenance
18.0/18
Weakest Signal
Safety / Integrity
18.6/25
What Would Improve It
Increase the share of verified signed commits for clearer maintainer identity.
Recent Changes
2026-07-14
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #8
Maintainer Checklist
Increase signed commitsRaise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade A reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage B is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (3 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →
Signals refreshed2026-07-15 01:00 UTC·Repo last pushed yesterday
Public supply-chain signals for Codebase Memory MCP are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but Codebase Memory MCP carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does Codebase Memory MCP publish package provenance?
Yes. Codebase Memory MCP's package releases carry build provenance attestations, which cryptographically link the published package back to its source repository and CI workflow.
Does Codebase Memory MCP have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Codebase Memory MCP has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 7.7/10. 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 Codebase Memory MCP actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does Codebase Memory MCP use?
Codebase Memory MCP ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Codebase Memory MCP's commits signed?
30% of the last 100 commits to Codebase Memory MCP 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
medium confidence
Implemented
Codebase Memory MCP appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
None detected
No clear third-party provider dependency detected.
Credential signal:
No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
medium confidence
Extensions
Extension based plugin/integration surface detected.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
high confidence
Match
Published package metadata matches the tracked repo
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live
Maintain Codebase Memory MCP?
HVTrust scores Codebase Memory MCP 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.
