E2B
Website
Open-source, secure environment with real-world tools for enterprise-grade agents.
Is E2B safe? Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.
Compare E2B
How does it stack up against its Sandboxes & Runtimes neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: E2B scores 78.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #188 of 1371 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 6.8/10; 80% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (@e2b/sdk, e2b); last pushed 2026-10-09. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
What E2B can reach, and who runs it
Checked 2026-10-06, 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.
What it can reach
- PUBLISHER Each sandbox runs in its own Firecracker microVM with its own kernel, so code is isolated at the hypervisor boundary rather than in a container.
Where your data goes
- PUBLISHER Sandboxes are destroyed on timeout or shutdown. A paused sandbox keeps its filesystem and memory until it is resumed.
Security practice
- PUBLISHER Holds a SOC 2 Type II report, available under NDA from trust.e2b.dev, and signs HIPAA BAAs on Enterprise plans. Vulnerability reports go to [email protected]; testing against E2B needs prior written consent.
- CHECKED GitHub private vulnerability reporting is enabled on the SDK repository, which has no SECURITY.md. e2b.dev serves no security.txt.
How E2B 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 packagesnpm publish --provenance from CI +12.8 → 90.8 A · #1 of 11
- Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 6.8 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Fuzzing 0, Security-Policy 0 +4.6 → 82.6 A · #2 of 11
- Sign every commit80% signed today +1.0 → 79.0 B · #2 of 11
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships E2B 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/e2b-dev/e2b, Apache-2.0, last pushed 2026-10-09. 80% 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 6.8/10 (scanned Oct 4, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review5
- Branch Protection4
- Signed Releasesn/a
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies6
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 10Branch-Protection 4CI-Tests 10CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review 5Contributors 10Dangerous-Workflow 10Dependency-Update-Tool 10Fuzzing 0License 10Maintained 10Packaging 10Pinned-Dependencies 6SAST 10Security-Policy 0Signed-Releases -1Token-Permissions 0Vulnerabilities 9 -
What you install today No known advisories
Latest releases checked: @e2b/sdk 2.5.0, e2b 2.53.1. 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 E2B.
Evidence behind this score
Coverage A: 4 of 5 independent evidence types found.
- GitHub repository data
- Package downloads
- Supply-chain checks
- Public actions (missing)
- Community mentions
Verify this score yourself
Every build re-issues E2B’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 E2B compares in Sandboxes & Runtimes
- #1 BoxLite 85.4 +7.4
- #2 E2B 78.0 this agent
- #3 OpenShell 73.9 −4.1
- #4 Cube Sandbox 71.5 −6.5
- #5 OpenSandbox 70.8 −7.2
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks E2B’s 78.0.
Where the 78.0 comes from
HVTrust dimensions vs the Sandboxes & Runtimes average
78.0 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceE2B 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 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
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
86.5 / 100Common questions about E2B
Does E2B publish package provenance?
Does E2B have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is E2B actively maintained?
What license does E2B use?
Are E2B'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 E2B 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 E2B?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores E2B 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/e2b)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/e2b"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/e2b.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in Sandboxes & Runtimes
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 v4.4 · Raw JSON