Corrections & appeals — how it works
Any listed project (or anyone else) can dispute anything we publish: a trust score, a grade, a capability field, provenance drift, category, or listing status. This is the process, in full:
- What counts as evidence. Scores are computed only from public, checkable signals, so disputes are settled the same way: point at the public source (repo, registry, manifest, commit) that contradicts what we show. "Our score should be higher" isn't reviewable; "your provenance check missed our PEP 740 attestation, here's the PyPI link" is.
- What happens next. We re-check the signal against the source. If we're wrong, the fix ships as a data or detector change and takes effect on the next render — and if the error was in the methodology itself, that's said plainly in the methodology changelog. If we're right, you get the reasoning, not silence.
- Turnaround. HVTracker is independently run; expect a response within a week, usually sooner.
- Public appeal. Prefer a public record, or disagree with the outcome? Open a GitHub issue — disputes and their resolutions stay visible there.
Scores are never changed by request — only by evidence. You can also verify any score yourself against its signed credential.
Request a correction
Spotted wrong data on a listing? Send the repo, explain what is wrong, and optionally leave a contact email for follow-up.