updated 2026-10-09 08:15 UTC

LiteLLM

Repository Website

The fastest, litest AI Gateway. Rust core with Python SDK. Call 100+ LLM APIs in OpenAI (or native) format with cost tracking, guardrails, load balancing, and logging [Bedrock, Azure, OpenAI, Anthropic, OpenAI, VertexAI, vLLM, Nvidia NIM]

LLM Gateways & Infra Python Listed NOASSERTION

Is LiteLLM safe? Strong public trust posture, backed by multiple independent signals.

OSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
Provenance None
Signed commits 100%
Last push today
Advisories None known
Compare LiteLLM

How does it stack up against its LLM Gateways & Infra neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →
Suggest a correction

In detail: LiteLLM scores 78.5/100 (Grade B), ranked #181 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 6.1/10; 100% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (litellm); last pushed 2026-10-09. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How LiteLLM 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 LiteLLM 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.

  1. Source Signed

    github.com/BerriAI/litellm, NOASSERTION, last pushed 2026-10-09. 100% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so changes trace to a verified account.

  2. Review and release Mixed

    OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 6.1/10 (scanned Oct 8, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:

    • Code Review10
    • Branch Protection4
    • Signed Releasesn/a
    • Dangerous Workflow10
    • Token Permissions0
    • Pinned Dependencies6
    All 18 Scorecard checks
    Binary-Artifacts 0
    Branch-Protection 4
    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 6
    SAST 8
    Security-Policy 10
    Signed-Releases -1
    Token-Permissions 0
    Vulnerabilities 0

  3. Published packages Linked, not attested

    • PyPI litellm Source link points back to this repo No build attestation

    Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.

  4. What you install today No known advisories

    Latest release checked: litellm 1.104.1. 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 LiteLLM.

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 LiteLLM’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 LiteLLM compares in LLM Gateways & Infra

  1. #1 Bifrost 89.5 +11.0
  2. #2 vLLM 80.8 +2.3
  3. #3 LiteLLM 78.5 this agent
  4. #4 Headroom 76.6 −1.9
  5. #5 Ollama 66.9 −11.6

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks LiteLLM’s 78.5.

Where the 78.5 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the LLM Gateways & Infra average

78.5 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

LiteLLM LLM Gateways & Infra average (14 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits
12.6 / 25
2.5 above avg 10.1
Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance
10.8 / 18
0.5 below avg 11.3
Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard
13.7 / 17
1.1 above avg 12.6
Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity
20.0 / 20
3.4 above avg 16.6
AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads
20.0 / 20
6.7 above avg 13.3

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-10-02
Rank Moved
Rank rose 10 spots (#184 → #174)
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 88 spots (#88 → #176)
2026-09-21
Rank Moved
Rank rose 135 spots (#222 → #87)
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 Bifrost Get email alerts for LiteLLM View LLM Gateways & Infra Report missing data
97.7
Activity sub-score · out of 100
#3
In LLM Gateways & Infra

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 →

Signals refreshed 2026-10-09 08:15 UTC · Repo last pushed today

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-10-09

Activity & Reach

Stars
60.4k
Forks
12.2k
Last Push
2026-10-09
today
Commits (4 wk)
5757
Downloads (7d)
22,862,278
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
12
Open Issues
1808
Rank Change
▼1
was #180

Analysis

Activity Inputs

97.7 / 100
StarsRepository reach
28.7 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
25.0 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
25 / 25
CommunityFork signal
19.0 / 20

Common questions about LiteLLM

Public supply-chain signals for LiteLLM are strong: it has multiple independent trust indicators in place. This does not replace your own security review, but LiteLLM carries less obvious unverified-evidence risk than projects with thin signals.
Does LiteLLM publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for LiteLLM. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does LiteLLM have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
LiteLLM 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 LiteLLM actively maintained?
Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).
What license does LiteLLM use?
LiteLLM ships under NOASSERTION. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
Are LiteLLM's commits signed?
100% of the last 100 commits to LiteLLM 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 LiteLLM head-to-head

LiteLLM vs Bifrost → LiteLLM vs vLLM → LiteLLM vs Headroom →

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
high confidence
Implemented
LiteLLM appears to expose MCP server capabilities.
Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.
External Service Dependencies
high confidence
7 detected
Public provider/service dependencies detected.
Credential signal: API keys or service config markers documented.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared 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 LiteLLM'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.

2026-09-01
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Postgres
2026-08-12
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Postgres
2026-07-17
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Multi-provider (LiteLLM)

Maintain LiteLLM?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores LiteLLM 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
Rank 14Surface 2Surface 1
2026-10-02
Rank Moved
Rank rose 10 spots (#184 → #174)
2026-09-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 88 spots (#88 → #176)
2026-09-21
Rank Moved
Rank rose 135 spots (#222 → #87)
2026-09-18
Rank Moved
Rank rose 17 spots (#233 → #216)
2026-09-17
Rank Moved
Rank rose 20 spots (#253 → #233)
2026-09-15
Rank Moved
Rank rose 11 spots (#262 → #251)
2026-09-14
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 35 spots (#227 → #262)
2026-09-13
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 20 spots (#207 → #227)
2026-09-11
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 28 spots (#184 → #212)
2026-09-08
Rank Moved
Rank rose 29 spots (#209 → #180)
2026-09-07
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 15 spots (#194 → #209)
2026-09-05
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 43 spots (#149 → #192)
2026-09-04
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 11 spots (#138 → #149)
2026-09-01
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Postgres
2026-08-31
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 13 spots (#116 → #129)
2026-08-12
Provider Removed
Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Postgres
2026-07-17
Provider Added
Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Multi-provider (LiteLLM)
GitHub → Website → PyPI: litellm

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers
HVTrust 78.5 Grade B
Markdown:
[![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/litellm.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/litellm)
HTML:
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/litellm"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/litellm.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in LLM Gateways & Infra

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · 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