Cua has an HVTrust score of 77.5/100 (Grade B), ranked #198 of 1371 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Cua?

Cua scores 77.5/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 29.2k GitHub stars and is categorized under Browser & Computer Use.

Cua

Repository

Website

Scale computer-use 2.0 with open-source drivers, cross-OS fleets, and benchmarks for training, evaluation, and data generation.

Browser & Computer Use Rust Listed MIT

Is Cua safe? Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.

OSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10

Provenance None

Signed commits 98%

Last push today

Advisories None known

Compare Cua

How does it stack up against its Browser & Computer Use neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Suggest a correction

In detail: Cua scores 77.5/100 (Grade B), ranked #198 of 1371 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 5.9/10; 98% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (cua); last pushed 2026-10-09. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Cua 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.

Publish build provenance for its packagesPyPI Trusted Publishing attestations +12.6 → 90.1 A · #3 of 45
Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 5.9 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Code-Review 0, SAST 0 +6.5 → 84.0 A · #8 of 45

Already done? Suggest a correction Add the trust badge

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Cua and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the package you install. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.

Source Signed

github.com/trycua/cua, MIT, last pushed 2026-10-09. 98% 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 5.9/10 (scanned Oct 8, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review0
- Branch Protection3
- Signed Releases3
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies5
All 18 Scorecard checks

Binary-Artifacts 10

Branch-Protection 3

CI-Tests 10

CII-Best-Practices 0

Code-Review 0

Contributors 10

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Dependency-Update-Tool 10

Fuzzing 10

License 10

Maintained 10

Packaging 10

Pinned-Dependencies 5

SAST 0

Security-Policy 10

Signed-Releases 3

Token-Permissions 0

Vulnerabilities 0
Published packages Linked, not attested
- PyPI cua Source link points back to this repo No build attestation
Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.
What you install today No known advisories

Latest release checked: cua 0.4.1. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-10-09).

Changes to this chain

No change to package provenance, package source links, Scorecard coverage or license in HVTracker's daily snapshots of Cua.

Evidence behind this score

Coverage B: 3 of 5 independent evidence types found.

GitHub repository data
Package downloads
Supply-chain checks
Public actions (missing)
Community mentions (missing)

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Cua’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.

Signed credential (JSON) How to verify

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 Cua compares in Browser & Computer Use

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Cua’s 77.5.

Where the 77.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Browser & Computer Use average

77.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Cua Browser & Computer Use average (45 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits

12.3 / 25

2.5 above avg 9.8

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

1.8 below avg 12.6

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

13.5 / 17

1.6 above avg 11.9

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

20.0 / 20

7.0 above avg 13.0

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

15.7 / 20

4.5 above avg 11.2

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.

Recent Changes

2026-10-05

Rank Moved

Rank rose 36 spots (#244 → #208)

2026-09-25

Rank Moved

Rank rose 27 spots (#263 → #236)

2026-09-23

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 156 spots (#103 → #259)

Maintainer Checklist

Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.9/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.

Publish provenance Add package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.

Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Cua View Browser & Computer Use Report missing data

92.2

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#10

In Browser & Computer Use

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 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 →

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-09

Activity & Reach

Stars

29.2k

Forks

2.1k

Last Push

2026-10-09

today

Commits (4 wk)

645

Downloads (7d)

5,279

pypi

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

582

Rank Change

▼1

was #197

Analysis

Activity Inputs

92.2 / 100

StarsRepository reach

26.8 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

25.0 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

25 / 25

CommunityFork signal

15.4 / 20

Common questions about Cua

Public supply-chain signals for Cua are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but Cua carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.

Does Cua publish package provenance?

No published build provenance is currently detected for Cua. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.

Does Cua have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Cua has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.9/10. 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 Cua actively maintained?

Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).

What license does Cua use?

Cua ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are Cua's commits signed?

98% of the last 100 commits to Cua 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.

AI agent surface

MCP, providers, tool surface

Scored in HVTrust

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

Cua appears to expose MCP server capabilities.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

high confidence

2 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.

Tool / Plugin Surface

high confidence

Declared

Declared 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

How this surface has changed

Detected changes to Cua'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.

2026-09-07

Tool Surface Changed

Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared

Maintain Cua?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Cua 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.

Submit a correction → Add the trust badge

Reputation Timeline

Signal history

2026-10-05

Rank Moved

Rank rose 36 spots (#244 → #208)

2026-09-25

Rank Moved

Rank rose 27 spots (#263 → #236)

2026-09-23

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 156 spots (#103 → #259)

2026-09-21

Rank Moved

Rank rose 166 spots (#269 → #103)

2026-09-16

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#261 → #271)

2026-09-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#243 → #253)

2026-09-10

Rank Moved

Rank rose 23 spots (#265 → #242)

2026-09-09

Rank Moved

Rank rose 19 spots (#284 → #265)

2026-09-07

Tool Surface Changed

Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared

2026-09-07

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#267 → #277)

2026-09-05

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 60 spots (#205 → #265)

2026-09-03

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 52 spots (#148 → #200)

2026-09-03

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust down 3.2pts (74.2 → 71.0)

2026-08-31

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 17 spots (#122 → #139)

2026-08-26

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#99 → #112)

2026-08-19

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#91 → #104)

2026-08-16

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#92 → #104)

2026-08-12

Rank Moved

Rank rose 12 spots (#108 → #96)

2026-08-08

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 11 spots (#106 → #117)

2026-07-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 14 spots (#93 → #107)

GitHub → Website → PyPI: cua

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

Markdown:
            [![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/cua.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/cua)
            
HTML:
            <a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/cua"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/cua.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Browser & Computer Use

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON

Cua

How Cua could raise its score

Chain of custody

Source Signed

Review and release Mixed

Published packages Linked, not attested

What you install today No known advisories

Changes to this chain

Evidence behind this score

Verify this score yourself

What this score doesn’t check

How Cua compares in Browser & Computer Use

Where the 77.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Browser & Computer Use average

Quick Trust Read

Rank Trend

Activity & Reach

Analysis

Activity Inputs

Common questions about Cua

AI agent surface

Maintain Cua?

Reputation Timeline

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

Other agents in Browser & Computer Use