Is Octop safe to use?

Octop has an HVTrust score of 65.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #533 of 1387 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Octop?

Octop scores 65.0/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 12.0k GitHub stars and is categorized under Multi-Agent Systems.

Octop

Repository Website by TencentCloud

A smarter, self-hosted AI assistant — multi-user, multi-agent.

Multi-Agent Systems Python Listed MIT

Is Octop safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

OSSF Scorecard 4.8 / 10

Provenance None

Signed commits 88%

Last push today

Advisories None known

Compare Octop

How does it stack up against its Multi-Agent Systems neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Suggest a correction

In detail: Octop scores 65.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #533 of 1387 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 4.8/10; 88% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (octop); last pushed 2026-11-15. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Octop 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.

Publish build provenance for its packagesPyPI Trusted Publishing attestations +14.7 → 79.7 B · #4 of 43
Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 4.8 to 9.0lowest checks: CII-Best-Practices 0, Dependency-Update-Tool 0, Fuzzing 0 +8.8 → 73.8 B · #4 of 43
Sign every commit88% signed today +0.6 → 65.6 B · #8 of 43

Already done? Suggest a correction Add the trust badge

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Octop 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.

Source Signed

github.com/TencentCloud/Octop, MIT, last pushed 2026-11-15. 88% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so changes trace to a verified account.
Review and release Mixed

OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 4.8/10 (scanned Oct 31, 2026, refresh pending). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review3
- Branch Protection3
- Signed Releases0
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies1
All 18 Scorecard checks

Binary-Artifacts 10

Branch-Protection 3

CI-Tests 7

CII-Best-Practices 0

Code-Review 3

Contributors 10

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Dependency-Update-Tool 0

Fuzzing 0

License 10

Maintained 10

Packaging 10

Pinned-Dependencies 1

SAST 7

Security-Policy 10

Signed-Releases 0

Token-Permissions 0

Vulnerabilities 0
Published packages Not linked
- PyPI octop Source link isn't a GitHub repo No build attestation
Without a build attestation, nothing proves the published files were built from this repository.
What you install today No known advisories

Latest release checked: octop 1.0.2. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-11-14).

Changes to this chain

2026-09-30 OSSF Scorecard: 3.9/10

Evidence behind this score

Coverage B: 3 of 5 independent evidence types found.

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

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Octop’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 Octop compares in Multi-Agent Systems

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Octop’s 65.0.

Where the 65.0 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Multi-Agent Systems average

65.0 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Octop Multi-Agent Systems average (43 agents)

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

10.4 / 25

1.6 above avg 8.8

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

0.5 below avg 11.3

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

12.6 / 17

in line with avg 12.2

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

20.0 / 20

7.2 above avg 12.8

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

14.1 / 20

3.9 above avg 10.2

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

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

Recent Changes

2026-11-09

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

2026-11-08

Grade Changed

Trust grade B → C

2026-11-06

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

Maintainer Checklist

Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 4.8/10. 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 another agent View Multi-Agent Systems Report missing data

89.5

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#10

In Multi-Agent Systems

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 →

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-11-15

Activity & Reach

Stars

12.0k

Forks

1.7k

Last Push

2026-11-15

today

Commits (4 wk)

149

Downloads (7d)

1,623

pypi

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

370

Rank Change

▲4

was #537

Analysis

Activity Inputs

89.5 / 100

StarsRepository reach

24.5 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

25.0 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

25 / 25

CommunityFork signal

15.0 / 20

Common questions about Octop

Octop 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 Octop publish package provenance?

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

Does Octop have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Octop has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 4.8/10. 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 Octop actively maintained?

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

What license does Octop use?

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

Are Octop's commits signed?

88% of the last 100 commits to Octop 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

medium confidence

Declared

MCP support appears present, but direct server implementation is less certain.

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.

browser
database

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

Package Provenance Drift

low confidence

Unknown

Package source metadata is missing or inconclusive

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 Octop'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.

2026-10-16

Provider Added

Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Firecrawl

Maintain Octop?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Octop 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

2026-11-09

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

2026-11-08

Grade Changed

Trust grade B → C

2026-11-06

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

2026-11-06

Rank Moved

Rank rose 12 spots (#538 → #526)

2026-11-02

Rank Moved

Rank rose 11 spots (#547 → #536)

2026-10-25

Rank Moved

Rank rose 21 spots (#563 → #542)

2026-10-16

Provider Added

Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Firecrawl

2026-10-16

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 56 spots (#523 → #579)

2026-10-12

Rank Moved

Rank rose 42 spots (#567 → #525)

2026-10-07

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#557 → #569)

2026-10-06

Rank Moved

Rank rose 46 spots (#603 → #557)

2026-09-30

Scorecard Added

OSSF Scorecard: 3.9/10

2026-09-30

Grade Changed

Trust grade D → C

2026-09-30

Rank Moved

Rank rose 653 spots (#1261 → #608)

2026-09-30

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 26.9pts (34.3 → 61.2)

2026-09-29

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #1261

GitHub → Website → PyPI: octop

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

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

Other agents in Multi-Agent Systems

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

Octop

How Octop could raise its score

Chain of custody

Source Signed

Review and release Mixed

Published packages Not linked

What you install today No known advisories

Changes to this chain

Evidence behind this score

Verify this score yourself

What this score doesn’t check

How Octop compares in Multi-Agent Systems

Where the 65.0 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the Multi-Agent Systems average

Quick Trust Read

Rank Trend

Activity & Reach

Analysis

Activity Inputs

Common questions about Octop

AI agent surface

Maintain Octop?

Reputation Timeline

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

Other agents in Multi-Agent Systems