Is Rasa safe?
Rasa scores 57.3/100 (Grade C), ranked #187 of 328 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 5.2/10;
recent commits are unsigned;
last pushed 2026-05-22. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
Quick Trust Read
Verdict
Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.
57.3/100 · Grade C
Strongest Signal
Adoption
16.9/20
Weakest Signal
Safety / Integrity
6.5/25
What Would Improve It
Publish package provenance or release attestations for stronger supply-chain evidence.
Recent Changes
2026-06-24
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 23 spots (#175 → #198)
2026-06-23
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 12 spots (#163 → #175)
2026-06-21
Rank Moved
Rank dropped 10 spots (#147 → #157)
Maintainer Checklist
Raise Scorecard signalsCurrent OSSF Scorecard is 5.2/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.
Publish provenanceAdd package provenance or release attestations so users can verify where shipped artifacts came from.
Increase signed commitsRaise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.
Refresh maintenance signalsThe repo was last pushed 50 days ago. Fresh activity helps separate stable projects from stale ones.
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 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 refreshed2026-07-11 04:00 UTC·Repo last pushed 50 days ago
Rank Trend
2026-07-052026-07-11
Activity & Reach
Stars
21.2k
Forks
4.9k
Last Push
2026-05-22
50 days ago
Commits (4 wk)
0
Downloads (7d)
77,865
pypi
HN mentions (30d)
254
Open Issues
8
Rank Change
▲1
was #188
Analysis
HVTrust Dimensions
57.3 / 100 · 100.0% confidence
Safety / IntegrityOSSF, provenance, signatures
6.5 / 25
Identity / ProvenanceListing and build link
10.8 / 18
TransparencyLicense and public checks
12.9 / 17
MaintenanceFreshness and commits
8.7 / 20
AdoptionStars and downloads
16.9 / 20
Activity Inputs
61.4 / 100
StarsRepository reach
26.0 / 30
FreshnessLast push recency
18.1 / 25
ActivityRecent commits
0.0 / 25
CommunityFork signal
17.2 / 20
Supply Chain Trust
Package Provenance
None
No package attestations found
OSSF Scorecard
5.2 / 10
OpenSSF Scorecard · scanned Jul 10, 2026
Signed Commits
—
Unable to query
Binary-Artifacts10
Branch-Protection8
CI-Tests1
CII-Best-Practices0
Code-Review9
Contributors10
Dangerous-Workflow10
Dependency-Update-Tool10
Fuzzing0
License10
Maintained0
Packaging10
Pinned-Dependencies6
SAST0
Security-Policy0
Signed-Releases-1
Token-Permissions0
Vulnerabilities0
Is Rasa safe?
Rasa 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 Rasa publish package provenance?
No published build provenance is currently detected for Rasa. This is common for open-source projects but means consumers cannot independently verify that the package on the registry matches the GitHub source.
Does Rasa have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Rasa 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 Rasa actively maintained?
Slowing down. Last push was 50 days ago — keep an eye on whether activity resumes.
What license does Rasa use?
Rasa ships under Apache-2.0. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.
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.
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.
Credential signal:
No explicit API-key/config marker detected.
Tool / Plugin Surface
high confidence
Declared
Declared plugin/integration surface detected.
code
database
filesystem
search
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 Rasa'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.
HVTrust scores Rasa 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.
