RoboOS
🤖 RoboOS: A Universal Embodied Operating System for Cross-Embodied and Multi-Robot Collaboration
Is RoboOS safe? Thin or incomplete trust evidence. Review carefully before production use.
Compare RoboOS
How does it stack up against its Robotics & Embodied neighbours?
Pick any agent to compare →In detail: RoboOS scores 33.7/100 (Grade D), ranked #1308 of 1378 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 1.8/10; 100% of recent commits are signed; last pushed 2025-12-18. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →
How RoboOS 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.
- Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 1.8 to 9.0lowest checks: Branch-Protection 0, CI-Tests 0, CII-Best-Practices 0 +15.0 → 48.7 D · #2 of 3
Chain of custody
Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships RoboOS and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the code you run. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.
-
Source Signed
github.com/FlagOpen/RoboOS, Apache-2.0, last pushed 2025-12-18. 100% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature, so changes trace to a verified account.
-
Review and release Weak
OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 1.8/10 (scanned Oct 17, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review2
- Branch Protection0
- Signed Releasesn/a
- Dangerous Workflown/a
- Token Permissionsn/a
- Pinned Dependenciesn/a
All 18 Scorecard checks
Binary-Artifacts 10Branch-Protection 0CI-Tests 0CII-Best-Practices 0Code-Review 2Contributors 3Dangerous-Workflow -1Dependency-Update-Tool 0Fuzzing 0License 10Maintained 0Packaging -1Pinned-Dependencies -1SAST 0Security-Policy 0Signed-Releases -1Token-Permissions -1Vulnerabilities 0 -
Published packages None
No registry package. RoboOS is used from its repository, so what you run is whatever you check out: pin a release tag or commit.
Changes to this chain
- 2026-07-29 OSSF Scorecard: 1.8/10
Evidence behind this score
Coverage C: 2 of 5 independent evidence types found.
- GitHub repository data
- Package downloads (missing)
- Supply-chain checks
- Public actions (missing)
- Community mentions (missing)
Verify this score yourself
Every build re-issues RoboOS’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.
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 RoboOS compares in Robotics & Embodied
- #1 LeRobot 90.3 +56.6
- #2 Habitat-Lab 44.5 +10.8
- #3 RoboOS 33.7 this agent
Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks RoboOS’s 33.7.
Where the 33.7 comes from
HVTrust dimensions
33.7 / 100 · 100.0% confidenceQuick Trust Read
How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade D 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 →
Rank Trend
Activity & Reach
Analysis
Activity Inputs
26.0 / 100Common questions about RoboOS
Does RoboOS publish package provenance?
Does RoboOS have an OpenSSF Scorecard?
Is RoboOS actively maintained?
What license does RoboOS use?
Are RoboOS's commits signed?
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 RoboOS head-to-head
AI agent surface
MCP, providers, tool surface
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 →
- code
- database
- MCP signal live
- External deps live
- Tool / plugin surface live
- Package provenance drift live
Maintain RoboOS?
For maintainers
HVTrust scores RoboOS 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.
Reputation Timeline
Signal history
Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →
For maintainers
[](https://hvtracker.net/agents/roboos)
<a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/roboos"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/roboos.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>
Other agents in Robotics & Embodied
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON