Container Use
Website
Development environments for coding agents. Enable multiple agents to work safely and independently with your preferred stack.
Is Container Use safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
Compare Container Use
How does it stack up against its Sandboxes & Runtimes neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: Container Use scores 55.5/100 (Grade C), ranked #804 of 1371 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 4.8/10; 99% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-09-21. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How Container Use 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 4.8 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Fuzzing 0, Pinned-Dependencies 0 +8.8 → 64.3 C · #6 of 11
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Container Use 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/dagger/container-use, Apache-2.0, last pushed 2026-09-21. 99% 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 4.8/10 (scanned Oct 5, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review10
- Branch Protection6
- Signed Releases0
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies0
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 10Branch-Protection 6CI-Tests 8CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review 10Contributors 10Dangerous-Workflow 10Dependency-Update-Tool 10Fuzzing 0License 10Maintained 5Packaging -1Pinned-Dependencies 0SAST 0Security-Policy 0Signed-Releases 0Token-Permissions 0Vulnerabilities 0 -
Published packages None
No registry package. Container Use 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 Container Use.
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 Container Use’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 Container Use compares in Sandboxes & Runtimes
- #5 OpenSandbox 70.6 +15.1
- #6 Fence 56.6 +1.1
- #7 Container Use 55.5 this agent
- #8 Daytona 53.8 −1.7
- #9 Agent Infra Sandbox 53.2 −2.3
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Container Use’s 55.5.
Where the 55.5 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the Sandboxes & Runtimes average
55.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceContainer Use Sandboxes & Runtimes average (11 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 C 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
54.6 / 100Common questions about Container Use
Does Container Use publish package provenance?
Does Container Use have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is Container Use actively maintained?
What license does Container Use use?
Are Container Use'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 Container Use 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
Maintain Container Use?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores Container Use 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/container-use)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/container-use"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/container-use.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in Sandboxes & Runtimes
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