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 — 74.8/100 (Grade B) vs 52.3/100 (Grade C), a 22.5-point gap. Full breakdown below.
Signal Container Usedagger/container-use E2Be2b-dev/e2b
HVTrust score 52.3 74.8
Evidence grade C B
Coverage grade C A
Overall rank #413 #89
Rank in Sandboxes & Runtimes #4 #2
GitHub stars 4.0k 13.3k
Last updated 57d ago 1d ago
Build provenance No No
OSSF Scorecard 4.4 / 10 5.2 / 10
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Downloads 982k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25 10.5 10.7
Identity & provenance / 18 10.8 10.8
Transparency / 17 12.2 12.9
Maintenance / 20 8.2 19.5
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 v4.3 →