Registry › Compare › Fence vs OpenSandbox

Fence vs OpenSandbox

OpenSandbox leads on trust: 73.5/100 (Grade B) against 57.0/100 (Grade C), a 16.5-point gap. Fence leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency; OpenSandbox leads on maintenance and adoption, and rests on broader evidence.

C Fence 57.0

Lightweight, container-free sandbox for running commands with network and filesystem restrictions

fencesandbox/fence · #797 overall · #6 Sandboxes & Runtimes · coverage C (2/5)

Choose Fence if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.

+4.8Safety / Integrity: 79% of recent commits signed, against 38%
+1.8Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.0 against 4.8

B OpenSandbox 73.5

Secure, Fast, and Extensible Sandbox runtime for AI agents.

opensandbox-group/OpenSandbox · #294 overall · #4 Sandboxes & Runtimes · coverage B (3/5)

Choose OpenSandbox if maintenance and adoption matter most.

+10.5Adoption: 17.1k GitHub stars against 1k
+8.0Maintenance
B vs CEvidence coverage: 3 of 5 independent signal types, against 2

Where they differ

12.7

Safety / IntegrityFence +4.8

7.9

14.4

TransparencyFence +1.8

12.6

11.9

MaintenanceOpenSandbox +8.0

19.9

7.2

AdoptionOpenSandbox +10.5

17.7

+0.0

Runtime calibrationOpenSandbox +4.6

+4.6

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

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

Full evidence

Signal	Fencefencesandbox/fence	OpenSandboxopensandbox-group/OpenSandbox
HVTrust score	57.0	73.5
Evidence grade	C	B
Coverage grade	C	B
Overall rank	#797	#294
Rank in Sandboxes & Runtimes	#6	#4
GitHub stars	1.0k	17.1k
Last updated	1d ago	1d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	7.0 / 10	4.8 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	—	414k/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.7	7.9
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	14.4	12.6
Maintenance / 20	11.9	19.9
Adoption / 20	7.2	17.7
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	Implemented
External providers	—	2 — Postgres, Redis
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	—	extensions
Provenance drift	—	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Fence profile OpenSandbox 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 v4.4 →