Dify has an HVTrust score of 78.8/100 (Grade B), ranked #73 of 1308 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Dify?

Dify scores 78.8/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 153.4k GitHub stars and is categorized under Workflow Platforms.

Dify

langgenius/dify

Build Agentic workflows, RAG pipelines, with rich AI model and tool support on one collaborative workspace. Deploy on cl

Workflow Platforms TypeScript Grade B Listed NOASSERTION Source-available

78.8/100

Rank #73 of 1308

Compare Dify

How does it stack up against its Workflow Platforms neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.

Open compare tool Suggest correction

Listing state

Listed

Evidence coverage

Grade A · 4/5 signals

Last push

2026-08-25 · 0d ago

Recent change

No recent signal change

Is Dify safe? Dify scores 78.8/100 (Grade B), ranked #73 of 1308 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage A (4 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 6.1/10; 100% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-25. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Workflow Platforms

#3 Botpress — 88.0 (A) → #4 Langflow — 78.9 (B) → #6 Flyte — 72.2 (B) → #7 Flowise — 71.9 (B) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

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

Maintainer Checklist

Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 6.1/10. 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 Trigger.dev Get email alerts for Dify View Workflow Platforms Report missing data

100.0

Activity sub-score · out of 100

In Workflow Platforms

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 A is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (4 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Rank Trend

2026-08-11 2026-08-25

Activity & Reach

Stars

153.4k

Forks

24.2k

Last Push

2026-08-25

today

Commits (4 wk)

871

Downloads (7d)

19,857,567

npm+docker+pypi

HN mentions (30d)

479

Open Issues

298

Rank Change

was #73

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Workflow Platforms

78.8 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Dify Workflow Platforms average (24 agents)

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

12.6 / 25

2.4 above avg 10.2

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

0.9 below avg 11.7

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

13.7 / 17

1.3 above avg 12.4

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

20.0 / 20

1.7 above avg 18.3

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

20.0 / 20

7.1 above avg 12.9

Activity Inputs

100.0 / 100

StarsRepository reach

30 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

25.0 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

25 / 25

CommunityFork signal

20 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance

None

No package attestations found

OSSF Scorecard

6.1 / 10

OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 25, 2026

Signed Commits

100%

of last 100 commits verified

Binary-Artifacts 10

Branch-Protection 1

CI-Tests 10

CII-Best-Practices 0

Code-Review 10

Contributors 10

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Dependency-Update-Tool 10

Fuzzing 0

License 9

Maintained 10

Packaging 10

Pinned-Dependencies 7

SAST 6

Security-Policy 10

Signed-Releases 0

Token-Permissions 0

Vulnerabilities 0

Is Dify safe?

Source-available software. A lower HVTrust score reflects fewer public supply-chain artifacts (open license, build provenance, signed commits) — not a security finding. Dify may have internal security practices not visible through public signals.

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

Does Dify publish package provenance?

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

Does Dify have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Dify has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 6.1/10. 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 Dify actively maintained?

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

What license does Dify use?

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

Are Dify's commits signed?

100% of the last 100 commits to Dify 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.

Compare Dify head-to-head

Dify vs Trigger.dev → Dify vs n8n → Dify vs Botpress →

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

medium confidence

Declared

MCP support appears present, but direct server implementation is less certain.

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

high confidence

Declared

Declared plugin/integration surface detected.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

Package Provenance Drift

medium confidence

Partial

Some package metadata matches; some source metadata is missing

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live

Maintain Dify?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Dify 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

2026-06-03

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 4.1pts (73.3 → 77.4)

2026-05-29

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 10.0pts (61.5 → 71.5)

GitHub → PyPI: dify-client npm: dify

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

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

Other agents in Workflow Platforms

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · npm Registry (downloads, provenance) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI · Algolia HN Search API
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.3 · Raw JSON