Is ECC safe?
ECC scores 76.5/100 (Grade B), ranked #68 of 418 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 6.1/10;
81% of recent commits are signed;
last pushed 2026-07-17. 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.
76.5/100 · Grade B
Strongest Signal
Maintenance
19.6/20
Weakest Signal
Safety / Integrity
11.7/25
What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-07-09
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Redis
2026-07-04
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Google Gemini, Redis, Supabase
2026-06-30
Rank Moved
Rank rose 14 spots (#78 → #64)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signalsCurrent OSSF Scorecard is 6.1/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.
Publish provenanceAdd package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.
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 →
Signals refreshed2026-07-19 12:00 UTC·Repo last pushed 2 days ago
Public supply-chain signals for ECC are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but ECC carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does ECC publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for ECC. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does ECC have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
ECC 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 ECC actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 2 day(s).
What license does ECC use?
ECC ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are ECC's commits signed?
81% of the last 100 commits to ECC 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
high confidence
Implemented
ECC appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Credential signal:
No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Marketplace
Marketplace plugin/integration surface detected.
database
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 ECC'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.
2026-07-09
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Redis
2026-07-04
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Google Gemini, Redis, Supabase
2026-06-16
Drift Warning Cleared
Provenance drift warning cleared (now: match)
2026-06-16
Provenance Removed
Package provenance attestation no longer detected
2026-06-15
Drift Warning Raised
Package-provenance drift warning: package metadata no longer clearly points at this repo
2026-06-15
Provenance Added
Package provenance attestation detected
2026-06-13
Drift Warning Cleared
Provenance drift warning cleared (now: match)
2026-06-13
Provenance Removed
Package provenance attestation no longer detected
2026-06-11
Drift Warning Raised
Package-provenance drift warning: package metadata no longer clearly points at this repo
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependencies: Anthropic, Google Gemini, OpenAI, Postgres, Redis, Supabase
2026-06-05
Mcp Status Changed
Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented
2026-06-05
Drift Warning Raised
Package-provenance drift warning: package metadata no longer clearly points at this repo
2026-06-05
Provenance Added
Package provenance attestation detected
Maintain ECC?
HVTrust scores ECC 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.
