Registry › Compare › Browser Harness vs BrowserOS

Browser Harness vs BrowserOS

Browser Harness leads on trust: 89.8/100 (Grade A) against 66.0/100 (Grade B), a 23.8-point gap. Browser Harness leads on adoption and provenance, and rests on broader evidence; BrowserOS leads on maintenance.

A Browser Harness 89.8

Browser Harness | Self-healing harness that enables LLMs to complete any task.

browser-use/browser-harness · #21 overall · #2 Browser & Computer Use · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Browser Harness if adoption and provenance matter most.

+8.5Adoption: 18.1k GitHub stars against 13.8k
+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+6.0Safety / Integrity: OSSF Scorecard 6.0 against 4.9
+0.9Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.0 against 4.9

B BrowserOS 66.0

🌐 The open-source Agentic browser; alternative to ChatGPT Atlas, Perplexity Comet, Dia.

browseros-ai/BrowserOS · #442 overall · #14 Browser & Computer Use · coverage C (2/5)

Choose BrowserOS if maintenance matters most.

+1.0Maintenance: last push 2d ago, against 14d ago

Where they differ

17.0

Safety / IntegrityBrowser Harness +6.0

11.0

18.0

Identity / ProvenanceBrowser Harness +7.2

10.8

13.6

TransparencyBrowser Harness +0.9

12.7

18.9

MaintenanceBrowserOS +1.0

19.9

18.4

AdoptionBrowser Harness +8.5

9.9

+3.9

Runtime calibrationBrowser Harness +2.2

+1.7

Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Browser Harness and BrowserOS, two Browser & Computer Use projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Browser Harnessbrowser-use/browser-harness	BrowserOSbrowseros-ai/BrowserOS
HVTrust score	89.8	66.0
Evidence grade	A	B
Coverage grade	B	C
Overall rank	#21	#442
Rank in Browser & Computer Use	#2	#14
GitHub stars	18.1k	13.8k
Last updated	14d ago	2d ago
Build provenance	Yes	No
OSSF Scorecard	6.0 / 10	4.9 / 10
License	MIT	AGPL-3.0
Downloads	1.4M/wk	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	17.0	11.0
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	10.8
Transparency / 17	13.6	12.7
Maintenance / 20	18.9	19.9
Adoption / 20	18.4	9.9
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	1 — Anthropic	1 — Amazon Bedrock
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	plugins	plugins
Provenance drift	Match	—

Open in the live compare tool → Browser Harness profile BrowserOS profile More Browser & Computer Use →

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption, scaled by an evidence-confidence factor. Grade bands: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Signals refresh daily. Full methodology v4.3 →