updated 2026-11-11 00:08 UTC

LayerFS

Repository Website

Ephemeral Workspaces, durable shared history. LayerFS gives every agent a complete, writable filesystem Workspace over shared committed history, without copying the base. Agents work in parallel, commit what changed as deduplicated checkpoints, then branch, rewind or merge. Try it with LayerFS ×…

Sandboxes & Runtimes Rust Listed MIT

Is LayerFS safe? Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.

OSSF Scorecard No result
Provenance None
Signed commits 24%
Last push yesterday
Compare LayerFS

How does it stack up against its Sandboxes & Runtimes neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: LayerFS scores 24.0/100 (Grade D), ranked #1371 of 1387 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage D (1 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; no OSSF Scorecard result yet; 24% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-11-10. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How LayerFS 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.

Already done? Suggest a correctionAdd the trust badge

Chain of custody

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

  1. Source Partly signed

    github.com/Ephemeral-AI-Lab/layerfs, MIT, last pushed 2026-11-10. 24% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.

  2. Review and release Not checked

    No OpenSSF Scorecard result yet, so branch protection, code review and release signing are unverified.

  3. Published packages None

    No registry package. LayerFS is used from its repository, so what you run is whatever you check out: pin a release tag or commit.

Changes to this chain

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

Evidence behind this score

Coverage D: 1 of 5 independent evidence types found.

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

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues LayerFS’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 LayerFS compares in Sandboxes & Runtimes

  1. #9 Daytona 51.5 +27.5
  2. #10 Agent Infra Sandbox 48.7 +24.7
  3. #11 Dormice 45.9 +21.9
  4. #12 Zeroboot 45.1 +21.1
  5. #13 LayerFS 24.0 this agent

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks LayerFS’s 24.0.

Where the 24.0 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Sandboxes & Runtimes average

24.0 / 100 · 50.0% confidence

LayerFS Sandboxes & Runtimes average (13 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
1.2 / 25
9.0 below avg 10.2
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
1.1 below avg 11.9
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
8.5 / 17
3.3 below avg 11.8
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
19.9 / 20
5.1 above avg 14.8
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
8.2 / 20
3.9 below avg 12.1

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Add or improve OSSF Scorecard coverage so safety checks are easier to verify.
Recent Changes
2026-11-10
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1371
Maintainer Checklist
Add Scorecard coverage Expose the repository to OpenSSF Scorecard checks so supply-chain posture is easier to verify.
Publish provenance Add package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.
Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
Compare with another agent
View Sandboxes & Runtimes Report missing data
80.8
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#13
In Sandboxes & Runtimes

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. Evidence coverage D is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (1 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Signals refreshed 2026-11-11 00:08 UTC · Repo last pushed yesterday

Activity & Reach

Stars
2.7k
Forks
154
Last Push
2026-11-10
yesterday
Commits (4 wk)
1359
Downloads (7d)
—
HN mentions (30d)
—
Open Issues
24
Rank Change
=
was #1371

Analysis

Activity Inputs

80.8 / 100
StarsRepository reach
20.6 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
24.9 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
10.2 / 20

Common questions about LayerFS

Public trust evidence for LayerFS 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 LayerFS publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for LayerFS. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does LayerFS have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
No OpenSSF Scorecard data is currently published for LayerFS. 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 LayerFS actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does LayerFS use?
LayerFS ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are LayerFS's commits signed?
24% of the last 100 commits to LayerFS 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
None detected
No MCP server signal detected.
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
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 LayerFS?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores LayerFS 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
Listed 1
2026-11-10
Newly Listed
First tracked at rank #1371
GitHub → Website →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 24.0 Grade D
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/layerfs.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/layerfs)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/layerfs"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/layerfs.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Sandboxes & Runtimes

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