Registry › Compare › HOL Guard vs open-kritt

HOL Guard vs open-kritt

HOL Guard leads on trust: 92.1/100 (Grade A) against 57.7/100 (Grade C), a 34.4-point gap. HOL Guard leads on supply-chain integrity and provenance, and rests on broader evidence.

A HOL Guard 92.1

Open-source antivirus for AI agents: block risky tools, secret access, prompt injection, malicious packages, MCP servers, plugins, and skills at runtime.

hashgraph-online/hol-guard · #7 overall · #1 Security & Guardrails · coverage B (3/5)

Choose HOL Guard if supply-chain integrity and provenance matter most.

+15.7Safety / Integrity: 94% of recent commits signed, against 51%
+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+4.1Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 9.6 against 4.8
+4.1Adoption

C open-kritt 57.7

Open-source, self-hosted AI vulnerability research tool that orchestrates agents to find and validate security issues in code.

Kritt-ai/open-kritt · #704 overall · #8 Security & Guardrails · coverage C (2/5)

open-kritt doesn't lead on any scored dimension in this pair.

Where they differ

24.2

Safety / IntegrityHOL Guard +15.7

8.5

18.0

Identity / ProvenanceHOL Guard +7.2

10.8

16.7

TransparencyHOL Guard +4.1

12.6

20.0

MaintenanceHOL Guard +2.2

17.8

12.1

AdoptionHOL Guard +4.1

8.0

+1.1

Runtime calibrationHOL Guard +1.1

+0.0

Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of HOL Guard and open-kritt, 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	HOL Guardhashgraph-online/hol-guard	open-krittKritt-ai/open-kritt
HVTrust score	92.1	57.7
Evidence grade	A	C
Coverage grade	B	C
Overall rank	#7	#704
Rank in Security & Guardrails	#1	#8
GitHub stars	670	2.2k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	Yes	No
OSSF Scorecard	9.6 / 10	4.8 / 10
License	Apache-2.0	AGPL-3.0
Downloads	10k/wk	—
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	24.2	8.5
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	10.8
Transparency / 17	16.7	12.6
Maintenance / 20	20.0	17.8
Adoption / 20	12.1	8.0
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	—
External providers	3 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, Multi-provider (LiteLLM)	—
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	extensions	—
Provenance drift	Match	—

Open in the live compare tool → HOL Guard profile open-kritt 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 v4.3 →