Is Open Interpreter safe to use?

Open Interpreter has an HVTrust score of 74.6/100 (Grade B), ranked #89 of 1204 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Open Interpreter?

Open Interpreter scores 74.6/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 67.9k GitHub stars and is categorized under Coding Agents.

Open Interpreter

openinterpreter/openinterpreter

A coding agent for open models like Kimi K3

Coding Agents Rust Grade B Listed Apache-2.0

74.6/100

Rank #89 of 1204

Compare Open Interpreter

How does it stack up against its Coding Agents 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 A · 4/5 signals

Last push

2026-08-08 · 1d ago

Recent change

No recent signal change

Is Open Interpreter safe? Open Interpreter scores 74.6/100 (Grade B), ranked #89 of 1204 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 5.4/10; 89% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2026-08-08. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

Ranked neighbours in Coding Agents

#8 oh-my-pi — 83.0 (A) → #9 Gemini CLI — 76.5 (B) → #11 OpenHands — 73.1 (B) → #12 mini-SWE-agent — 72.8 (B) →

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

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

Maintainer Checklist

Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 5.4/10. 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 Get email alerts for Open Interpreter View Coding Agents Report missing data

96.5

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#10

In Coding Agents

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 →

Activity & Reach

Stars

67.9k

Forks

5.8k

Last Push

2026-08-08

yesterday

Commits (4 wk)

671

Downloads (7d)

53,923

pypi

HN mentions (30d)

Open Issues

Rank Change

▲1

was #90

Analysis

HVTrust Dimensions vs Coding Agents

74.6 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Open Interpreter Coding Agents average (65 agents)

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

11.2 / 25

3.3 above avg 7.9

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

10.8 / 18

0.9 below avg 11.7

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

13.1 / 17

1.9 above avg 11.2

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

19.9 / 20

4.8 above avg 15.1

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

17.9 / 20

5.6 above avg 12.3

Activity Inputs

96.5 / 100

StarsRepository reach

29.0 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

24.9 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

25 / 25

CommunityFork signal

17.5 / 20

Supply Chain Trust

Package Provenance

None

No package attestations found

OSSF Scorecard

5.4 / 10

OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Aug 8, 2026

Signed Commits

89%

of last 100 commits verified

Binary-Artifacts 10

Branch-Protection 3

CI-Tests 9

CII-Best-Practices 0

Code-Review 4

Contributors 10

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Dependency-Update-Tool 10

Fuzzing 0

License 10

Maintained 10

Packaging -1

Pinned-Dependencies 8

SAST 0

Security-Policy 10

Signed-Releases 0

Token-Permissions 0

Vulnerabilities 0

Is Open Interpreter safe?

Open Interpreter 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 Open Interpreter publish package provenance?

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

Does Open Interpreter have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Open Interpreter has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 5.4/10. 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 Open Interpreter actively maintained?

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

What license does Open Interpreter use?

Open Interpreter ships under Apache-2.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are Open Interpreter's commits signed?

89% of the last 100 commits to Open Interpreter 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

high confidence

Implemented

Open Interpreter appears to expose MCP server capabilities.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

high confidence

1 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

OpenAI

Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.

Tool / Plugin Surface

medium confidence

Declared

Declared plugin/integration surface detected.

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

Maintain Open Interpreter?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Open Interpreter 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

2026-07-08

Scorecard Added

OSSF Scorecard: 5.0/10

2026-07-08

Grade Changed

Trust grade D → B

2026-07-08

Rank Moved

Rank rose 178 spots (#243 → #65)

2026-07-08

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 25.8pts (47.9 → 73.7)

2026-07-07

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #243

GitHub → PyPI: open-interpreter

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

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

Other agents in Coding Agents

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 v4.2 · Raw JSON