Registry › Compare › DvalinCode vs Garak

DvalinCode vs Garak

DvalinCode leads on trust: 83.1/100 (Grade A) against 65.6/100 (Grade B), a 17.5-point gap. DvalinCode leads on supply-chain integrity and provenance; Garak leads on adoption and rests on broader evidence. Note: DvalinCode's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.

A DvalinCode 83.1

Independent security verification for code written by humans and AI agents. Scan, repair, then prove it — Dvalin runs your project's own checks and issues a Verified Fix Record anyone can re-derive offline. Local-first, policy-bound, MIT.

arthurpanhku/dvalincode · #111 overall · #3 Security & Guardrails · coverage B (3/5)

Choose DvalinCode if supply-chain integrity and provenance matter most.

+10.4Safety / Integrity: 86% of recent commits signed, against 71%
+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+1.4Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.4 against 4.7
+0.7Maintenance: last push today, against 1d ago

B Garak 65.6

the LLM vulnerability scanner

NVIDIA/garak · #468 overall · #6 Security & Guardrails · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Garak if adoption matters most.

+7.2Adoption: 9.1k weekly downloads against 85
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

Where they differ

19.8

Safety / IntegrityDvalinCode +10.4

9.4

18.0

Identity / ProvenanceDvalinCode +7.2

10.8

13.9

TransparencyDvalinCode +1.4

12.5

19.1

MaintenanceDvalinCode +0.7

18.4

7.6

AdoptionGarak +7.2

14.8

+4.7

Runtime calibrationDvalinCode +5.0

-0.3

Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of DvalinCode and Garak, two Security & Guardrails projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	DvalinCodearthurpanhku/dvalincode	GarakNVIDIA/garak
HVTrust score	83.1	65.6
Evidence grade	A	B
Coverage grade	B	A
Overall rank	#111	#468
Rank in Security & Guardrails	#3	#6
GitHub stars	120	9.5k
Last updated	today	1d ago
Build provenance	Yes	No
OSSF Scorecard	6.4 / 10	4.7 / 10
License	MIT	Apache-2.0
Downloads	85/wk	9k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	19.8	9.4
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	10.8
Transparency / 17	13.9	12.5
Maintenance / 20	19.1	18.4
Adoption / 20	7.6	14.8
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	—
External providers	1 — Anthropic	8 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Cohere, …
Requires API keys	Yes	Yes
Plugin surface	plugins	plugins
Provenance drift	Match	Match

Open in the live compare tool → DvalinCode profile Garak profile More Security & Guardrails →

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 v4.4 →