Is Nanobot safe to use?

Nanobot has an HVTrust score of 59.1/100 (Grade C), ranked #328 of 1204 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Nanobot?

Nanobot scores 59.1/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 46.8k GitHub stars and is categorized under Agent Frameworks.

Nanobot

HKUDS/nanobot

Ultra-lightweight, open-source, self-hosted personal AI agent framework in Python with WebUI, tools, memory, MCP, multi-

Agent Frameworks Python Grade C Listed MIT

59.1/100

Rank #328 of 1204

Compare Nanobot

How does it stack up against its Agent Frameworks neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

Open compare tool Suggest correction

Listing state

Listed

Evidence coverage

Grade C · 2/5 signals

Last push

2026-08-09 · 0d ago

Recent change

Rank +3

Is Nanobot safe? Nanobot scores 59.1/100 (Grade C), ranked #328 of 1204 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage C (2 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: no package-provenance attestation found; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 5.2/10; recent commits are unsigned; last pushed 2026-08-09. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Agent Frameworks

#45 Omnigent — 60.3 (C) → #46 Langroid — 59.3 (C) → #48 Suna — 59.0 (C) → #49 Lagent — 58.8 (C) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.

Recent Changes

2026-08-08

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 79 spots (#248 → #327)

2026-08-07

Tool Surface Changed

Detected tool/plugin surface changed: extension-based → declared

2026-08-07

Provider Removed

Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Azure OpenAI, Firecrawl, Google Gemini

Maintainer Checklist

Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.2/10. 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.

Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.

Compare with another agent Get email alerts for Nanobot View Agent Frameworks Report missing data

96.2

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#47

In Agent Frameworks

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade C reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage C is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (2 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Activity & Reach

Stars

46.8k

Forks

8.3k

Last Push

2026-08-09

today

Commits (4 wk)

454

Downloads (7d)

—

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

197

Rank Change

▼1

was #327

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Agent Frameworks

59.1 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Nanobot Agent Frameworks average (117 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits

6.5 / 25

1.7 below avg 8.2

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

0.8 below avg 11.6

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

12.9 / 17

1.3 above avg 11.6

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

20.0 / 20

5.7 above avg 14.3

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

11.2 / 20

in line with avg 11.4

Activity Inputs

96.2 / 100

StarsRepository reach

28.0 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

25.0 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

25 / 25

CommunityFork signal

18.2 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance

None

No package attestations found

OSSF Scorecard

5.2 / 10

OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 8, 2026

Signed Commits

of last 100 commits verified

Binary-Artifacts 10

Branch-Protection 5

CI-Tests 10

CII-Best-Practices 0

Code-Review 1

Contributors 10

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Dependency-Update-Tool 0

Fuzzing 0

License 10

Maintained 10

Packaging -1

Pinned-Dependencies 3

SAST 0

Security-Policy 4

Signed-Releases -1

Token-Permissions 10

Vulnerabilities 0

Is Nanobot safe?

Nanobot has a mixed signal profile. Some trust indicators are present, others are missing. Whether it is safe for your use case depends on which gaps matter to you — review the breakdown below before adopting in production.

Does Nanobot publish package provenance?

No published build provenance is currently detected for Nanobot. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.

Does Nanobot have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Nanobot has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.2/10. 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 Nanobot actively maintained?

Actively maintained. The repository was pushed to within the last 1 day(s).

What license does Nanobot use?

Nanobot ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are Nanobot's commits signed?

0% of the last 100 commits to Nanobot 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

high confidence

3 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.

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

How this surface has changed

Detected changes to Nanobot'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.

2026-08-07

Tool Surface Changed

Detected tool/plugin surface changed: extension-based → declared

2026-08-07

Provider Removed

Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Azure OpenAI, Firecrawl, Google Gemini

2026-08-07

Mcp Status Changed

Detected MCP server support changed: declared → none

Maintain Nanobot?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Nanobot 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

2026-08-08

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 79 spots (#248 → #327)

2026-08-07

Tool Surface Changed

Detected tool/plugin surface changed: extension-based → declared

2026-08-07

Provider Removed

Runtime surface shrank — no longer detected: Azure OpenAI, Firecrawl, Google Gemini

2026-08-07

Mcp Status Changed

Detected MCP server support changed: declared → none

2026-07-30

Rank Moved

Rank rose 11 spots (#258 → #247)

2026-07-28

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 19 spots (#233 → #252)

2026-07-23

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#231 → #241)

2026-07-14

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#209 → #221)

2026-07-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 34 spots (#175 → #209)

2026-06-24

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #153

GitHub →

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

Markdown:
            [![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/nanobot.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/nanobot)
            
HTML:
            <a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/nanobot"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/nanobot.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in Agent Frameworks

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.2 · Raw JSON