RegistryCompare › Container Use vs E2B

Container Use vs E2B

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Container Use and E2B, two Sandboxes & Runtimes projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

E2B leads on trust — 76.8/100 (Grade B) vs 23.4/100 (Grade D), a 53.4-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal Container Usedagger/container-use E2Be2b-dev/e2b
HVTrust score 23.4 76.8
Evidence grade D B
Coverage grade D A
Overall rank #395 #59
Rank in Sandboxes & Runtimes #6 #1
GitHub stars 3.9k 13.0k
Last updated 33d ago 1d ago
Build provenance No No
OSSF Scorecard 6.4 / 10
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Downloads 982k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 5.0 12.2
Identity & provenance / 18 10.8 10.8
Transparency / 17 8.5 13.9
Maintenance / 20 9.8 19.6
Adoption / 20 8.6 17.9
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server Implemented Declared
External providers 1 — E2B
Requires API keys No Yes
Plugin surface
Provenance drift Match
Open in the live compare tool → Container Use profile E2B profile More Sandboxes & Runtimes →

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 v4.2 →