How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade D reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Full methodology →
Signals refreshed2026-06-11 18:03 UTC·Repo last pushed 13 days ago
Activity & Reach
Stars
4.3k
Forks
505
Last Push
2026-05-29
13 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
34
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
61
Rank Change
NEW
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
24.1 / 100 · 50.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
3.0 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
8.5 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
17.3 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
8.7 / 20
Activity Inputs
76.9 / 100
StarsRepository reach
21.8 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
23.2 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
19.3 / 25
CommunityFork signal
12.6 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
—
Not available
Signed Commits
60%
of last 100 commits verified
Is Engram safe?
Public trust evidence for Engram is thin: several supply-chain signals are missing or weak. This does not mean the project is unsafe — it means an outside observer cannot easily verify the usual integrity checks. Treat with extra scrutiny.
Does Engram publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Engram. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Engram have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for Engram. Maintainers can enable the Scorecard GitHub Action to get a public score; without it, automated supply-chain hygiene is harder for outsiders to verify.
Is Engram actively maintained?
Maintained. Last push was 13 days ago.
What license does Engram use?
Engram ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are Engram's commits signed?
60% of the last 100 commits to Engram 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.
HVTrust currently ranks supply-chain and project-integrity trust only. This public view shows a compact AI-agent surface snapshot from repo docs and manifests. These fields are descriptive context and do not affect the production HVTrust rank. An experimental local preview remains available in Score Lab →, and the policy boundary is tracked on the roadmap →
MCP Server Support
medium confidence
Implemented
Engram 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.
Google Gemini
Postgres
Credential signal:
No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Marketplace
Marketplace plugin/integration surface detected.
code
database
search
shell
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
Package Provenance Drift
N/A
No package source configured
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live
Maintain Engram?
HVTrust scores Engram 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.
Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license)
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v3.2 · Raw JSON
