Registry › Compare › Fence vs Rivet Agents

Fence vs Rivet Agents

Both are Grade C and 3.1 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Fence leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency; Rivet Agents leads on maintenance and adoption.

C Fence 56.6

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

fencesandbox/fence · #801 overall · #6 Sandboxes & Runtimes · coverage C (2/5)

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

+6.6Safety / Integrity: 79% of recent commits signed, against 35%
+2.9Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 7.0 against 3.5

C Rivet Agents 53.5

A durable process per agent, with memory that survives restarts

rivet-dev/agents · #900 overall · #7 Sandboxes & Runtimes · coverage C (2/5)

Choose Rivet Agents if maintenance and adoption matter most.

+6.8Maintenance: last push 2d ago, against 7d ago
+0.5Adoption: 1.6k GitHub stars against 1k

Where they differ

12.7

Safety / IntegrityFence +6.6

6.1

14.4

TransparencyFence +2.9

11.5

MaintenanceRivet Agents +6.8

18.3

7.2

AdoptionRivet Agents +0.5

7.7

+0.0

Runtime calibrationFence +0.9

-0.9

1 dimension identical: Identity 10.8 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Fence and Rivet Agents, 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	Rivet Agentsrivet-dev/agents
HVTrust score	56.6	53.5
Evidence grade	C	C
Coverage grade	C	C
Overall rank	#801	#900
Rank in Sandboxes & Runtimes	#6	#7
GitHub stars	1.0k	1.6k
Last updated	7d ago	2d ago
Build provenance	No	No
OSSF Scorecard	7.0 / 10	3.5 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	Apache-2.0
Downloads	—	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	12.7	6.1
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	10.8
Transparency / 17	14.4	11.5
Maintenance / 20	11.5	18.3
Adoption / 20	7.2	7.7
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	—	Declared
External providers	—	1 — E2B
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	—	extensions
Provenance drift	—	—

Open in the live compare tool → Fence profile Rivet Agents 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 →