Commit — Supply Chain Risk Scoring vs HAPI Strava MCP Server

Side by side on the facts. GitHub figures come straight from each repository; ratings come from signed-in reviewers here.

MetricCommit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringMCP Server HAPI Strava MCP ServerMCP Server

Type: Commit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringMCP Server; HAPI Strava MCP ServerMCP Server
Category: Commit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringLocation; HAPI Strava MCP ServerLocation
GitHub stars: Commit — Supply Chain Risk Scoring0; HAPI Strava MCP Server8
Trust scoreⓘAuditability and maintenance signals — not a security audit.: Commit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringNot yet assessed; HAPI Strava MCP Server79/100 · Good
Community rating: Commit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringNo reviews yet; HAPI Strava MCP ServerNo reviews yet
Last commit: Commit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringUnknown; HAPI Strava MCP Server9 days ago
Licence: Commit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringNone declared; HAPI Strava MCP ServerMIT
Official: Commit — Supply Chain Risk ScoringNo; HAPI Strava MCP ServerNo
Source: Commit — Supply Chain Risk Scoring Repository; HAPI Strava MCP Server Repository

Highlighted cells win that row on an objective measure. Rows without a clear winner — category, licence, source — are left unmarked. A higher trust score means better auditability and maintenance, not safer code.