Is Remote Agentic Coding System veilig?

Remote Agentic Coding System — Nerq Trust Score 59.1/100 (D-beoordeling). Score gebaseerd op 5 independent trust signals.

Remote Agentic Coding System is een software tool met een Nerq Vertrouwensscore van 59.1/100 (D), based on 5 onafhankelijke gegevensdimensies. Beveiliging: 0/100. Onderhoud: 1/100. Populariteit: 0/100. Gegevens afkomstig van meerdere openbare bronnen waaronder pakketregisters, GitHub, NVD, OSV.dev en OpenSSF Scorecard. Laatst bijgewerkt: n/a. Machineleesbare gegevens (JSON).

Is Remote Agentic Coding System veilig?

Vertrouwensscore details — Remote Agentic Coding System has a Nerq Trust Score of 59.1/100 (D). Measured across 5 independent trust signals.

Beveiligingsanalyse → Remote Agentic Coding System Privacyrapport →

Wat is de vertrouwensscore van Remote Agentic Coding System?

Remote Agentic Coding System heeft een Nerq Trust Score van 59.1/100 met het cijfer D. Deze score is gebaseerd op 5 onafhankelijk gemeten dimensies, waaronder beveiliging, onderhoud en community-adoptie.

Beveiliging
0
Naleving
87
Onderhoud
1
Documentatie
1
Populariteit
0

Wat zijn de belangrijkste beveiligingsbevindingen voor Remote Agentic Coding System?

Het sterkste signaal van Remote Agentic Coding System is naleving met 87/100. Er zijn geen bekende kwetsbaarheden gedetecteerd.

⚠Beveiligingsscore: 0/100 (zwak)
⚠Onderhoud: 1/100 — lage onderhoudsactiviteit
⚠Naleving: 87/100 — covers 45 of 52 jurisdicties
⚠Documentatie: 1/100 — beperkte documentatie
⚠Populariteit: 0/100 — gemeenschapsacceptatie

Wat is Remote Agentic Coding System en wie onderhoudt het?

OntwikkelaarLitos321
CategorieCoding
Bronhttps://github.com/Litos321/remote-agentic-coding-system
Frameworksopenai · anthropic

Naleving van regelgeving

EU AI Act Risk ClassMINIMAL
Compliance Score87/100
JurisdictionsAssessed across 52 jurisdicties

Populaire alternatieven in coding

Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT
65.3/100 · C
github
ollama/ollama
64.4/100 · C
github
langchain-ai/langchain
77.0/100 · B
github
x1xhlol/system-prompts-and-models-of-ai-tools
64.4/100 · C
github
anomalyco/opencode
78.5/100 · B
github

What Is Remote Agentic Coding System?

Remote Agentic Coding System is a software tool in the coding category: Control AI coding assistants remotely via Telegram and GitHub.. Nerq Trust Score: 59/100 (D).

Nerq independently analyzes every software tool, app, and extension across multiple trust signals including beveiliging vulnerabilities, onderhoud activity, license naleving, and gemeenschapsacceptatie.

How Nerq Assesses Remote Agentic Coding System's Safety

Nerq's Trust Score is calculated from 13+ independent signals aggregated into five dimensies. Here is how Remote Agentic Coding System performs in each:

The overall Trust Score of 59.1/100 (D) is the weighted combination of these measured signals. It is a measurement, not a pass/fail or suitability judgment — weigh the individual signals against your own requirements.

Who Typically Evaluates Remote Agentic Coding System?

Remote Agentic Coding System is commonly evaluated by:

How to read the signals: Remote Agentic Coding System's measured signals (beveiliging 0/100, onderhoud 1/100, documentatie 1/100, community 0/100) are shown above. These are measurements, not a suitability judgment — weigh each signal against the requirements of your own use case and risk tolerance.

How to Verify Remote Agentic Coding System's Safety Yourself

While Nerq provides automated trust analysis, we recommend these additional steps before adopting any software tool:

  1. Check the source code — Bekijk de repository's beveiliging policy, open issues, and recent commits for signs of active onderhoud.
  2. Scan dependencies — Use tools like npm audit, pip-audit, or snyk to check for known vulnerabilities in Remote Agentic Coding System's dependency tree.
  3. Beoordeling permissions — Understand what access Remote Agentic Coding System requires. Software tools should follow the principle of least privilege.
  4. Test in isolation — Run Remote Agentic Coding System in a sandboxed environment before granting access to production data or systems.
  5. Monitor continuously — Use Nerq's API to set up automated trust checks: GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=remote-agentic-coding-system
  6. Bekijk de license — Confirm that Remote Agentic Coding System's license is compatible with your intended use case. Pay attention to restrictions on commercial use, redistribution, and derivative works. Some AI tools use dual licensing or have separate terms for enterprise customers that differ from the open-source license.
  7. Check community signals — Look at the project's issue tracker, discussion forums, and social media presence. A healthy community actively reports bugs, contributes fixes, and discusses beveiliging concerns openly. Low community engagement may indicate limited peer review of the codebase.

Common Safety Concerns with Remote Agentic Coding System

When evaluating whether Remote Agentic Coding System is safe, consider these category-specific risks:

Data handling

Understand how Remote Agentic Coding System processes, stores, and transmits your data. Bekijk de tool's privacy policy and data retention practices, especially for sensitive or proprietary information.

Dependency beveiliging

Check Remote Agentic Coding System's dependency tree for known vulnerabilities. Tools with outdated or unmaintained dependencies pose a higher beveiliging risk.

Update frequency

Regularly check for updates to Remote Agentic Coding System. Beveiliging patches and bug fixes are only effective if you're running the latest version.

Third-party integrations

If Remote Agentic Coding System connects to external APIs or services, each integration point is a potential attack surface. Audit all third-party connections, verify that data shared with external services is minimized, and ensure that integration credentials are rotated regularly.

License and IP naleving

Verify that Remote Agentic Coding System's license is compatible with your intended use case. Some AI tools have restrictive licenses that limit commercial use, redistribution, or derivative works. Using Remote Agentic Coding System in violation of its license can expose your organization to legal liability.

Remote Agentic Coding System and the EU AI Act

Remote Agentic Coding System is classified as Minimal Risk under the EU AI Act. This is the lowest risk category, meaning it faces minimal regulatory requirements. However, transparency obligations still apply.

Nerq's naleving assessment covers 52 jurisdicties worldwide. For organizations deploying AI tools in regulated environments, understanding these classifications is essential for legal naleving.

Best Practices for Using Remote Agentic Coding System Safely

Whether you're an individual developer or an enterprise team, these practices will help you get the most from Remote Agentic Coding System while minimizing risk:

Conduct regular audits

Periodically review how Remote Agentic Coding System is used in your workflow. Check for unexpected behavior, permissions drift, and naleving with your beveiliging policies.

Keep dependencies updated

Ensure Remote Agentic Coding System and all its dependencies are running the latest stable versions to benefit from beveiliging patches.

Follow least privilege

Grant Remote Agentic Coding System only the minimum permissions it needs to function. Avoid granting admin or root access.

Monitor for beveiliging advisories

Subscribe to Remote Agentic Coding System's beveiliging advisories and vulnerability disclosures. Use Nerq's API to get automated trust score updates.

Document usage policies

Create and maintain a clear policy for how Remote Agentic Coding System is used within your organization, including data handling guidelines and acceptable use cases.

Situations That Warrant Independent Review of Remote Agentic Coding System

Nerq's signals are one input. In the following situations, evaluate Remote Agentic Coding System's measured signals against your own requirements before making a decision:

For each situation, compare Remote Agentic Coding System's measured trust score of 59.1/100 and its individual signals against your organization's own criteria. Nerq does not assert whether Remote Agentic Coding System is suitable for any particular use.

How Remote Agentic Coding System Compares to Industry Standards

Nerq indexes over 6 million software tools, apps, and packages across dozens of categories. Among coding tools, the average Trust Score is 62/100. Remote Agentic Coding System's score of 59.1/100 is near the category average of 62/100.

This places Remote Agentic Coding System in line with the typical coding tool tool. It meets baseline expectations but does not distinguish itself from peers on trust metrics.

Industry benchmarks matter because they contextualize a tool's safety profile. A score that looks matig in isolation may actually represent strong performance within a challenging category — or vice versa. Nerq's category-relative analysis helps teams make informed decisions by showing not just absolute quality, but how a tool ranks against its direct peers.

Trust Score History

Nerq continuously monitors Remote Agentic Coding System and recalculates its Trust Score as new data becomes available. Our scoring engine ingests real-time signals from source repositories, vulnerability databases (NVD, OSV.dev), package registries, and community metrics. When a new CVE is published, a major release ships, or onderhoud patterns change, Remote Agentic Coding System's score is updated within 24 hours.

Historical trust trends reveal whether a tool is improving, stable, or declining over time. A tool that consistently maintains or improves its score demonstrates ongoing commitment to beveiliging and quality. Conversely, a downward trend may signal reduced onderhoud, growing technical debt, or unresolved vulnerabilities. To track Remote Agentic Coding System's score over time, use the Nerq API: GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=remote-agentic-coding-system&include=history

Nerq retains trust score snapshots at regular intervals, enabling trend analysis across weeks and months. Enterprise users can access detailed historical reports showing how each dimension — beveiliging, onderhoud, documentatie, naleving, and community — has evolved independently, providing granular visibility into which aspects of Remote Agentic Coding System are strengthening or weakening over time.

Remote Agentic Coding System vs Alternatieven

In the coding category, Remote Agentic Coding System scores 59.1/100. There are higher-scoring alternatives available. For a detailed comparison, see:

Belangrijkste conclusies

Veelgestelde vragen

Is Remote Agentic Coding System veilig?
remote-agentic-coding-system met een Nerq Vertrouwensscore van 59.1/100 (D). Sterkste signaal: naleving (87/100). Score gebaseerd op Beveiliging (0/100), Onderhoud (1/100), Populariteit (0/100), Documentatie (1/100).
Wat is de vertrouwensscore van Remote Agentic Coding System?
remote-agentic-coding-system: 59.1/100 (D). Score gebaseerd op Beveiliging (0/100), Onderhoud (1/100), Populariteit (0/100), Documentatie (1/100). Compliance: 87/100. Scores worden bijgewerkt wanneer nieuwe data beschikbaar komen. API: GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=remote-agentic-coding-system
Wat zijn veiligere alternatieven voor Remote Agentic Coding System?
In de categorie Coding, higher-rated alternatives include Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT (65/100), ollama/ollama (64/100), langchain-ai/langchain (77/100). remote-agentic-coding-system scores 59.1/100.
Hoe vaak wordt de beveiligingsscore van Remote Agentic Coding System bijgewerkt?
Nerq recomputes Remote Agentic Coding System's trust score as new data becomes available. Current: 59.1/100 (D). API: GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=remote-agentic-coding-system
Kan ik Remote Agentic Coding System gebruiken in een gereguleerde omgeving?
Remote Agentic Coding System: 59.1/100 (D). Compliance: 45 of 52 jurisdicties. EU AI Act compliant. Evaluate against your own regulatory requirements.
API: /v1/preflight Trust Badge API Docs

Zie ook

Disclaimer: Nerq-vertrouwensscores zijn geautomatiseerde beoordelingen op basis van openbaar beschikbare signalen. Ze vormen geen aanbeveling of garantie. Voer altijd uw eigen verificatie uit.

We gebruiken cookies voor analyse en caching. Privacy