bulletin MCP Server Security Report
Talk with agent swarms.
Run it securely
This server scored D. Run it behind runtime policy enforcement so one bad tool call can't become an incident.
Are you the maintainer?
Verify with GitHub to get alerted whenever Hugo0/swarmmemo changes score — and claim the badge for your README.
Claim this server- highNo unsafe deserialization — 13 occurrences
The short answer
- Is bulletin safe to use?
- bulletin scores 40/100 (grade D) on the Canopii Trust Index, and carries 1 confirmed security failure that caps its score: No unsafe deserialization. It passes 14 of the 22 controls that apply to it.
- What security issues does bulletin have?
- bulletin fails 1 control: No unsafe deserialization. Each failure on this page carries the evidence behind it — the file and line, dependency, or CVE that decided it.
- How reliable is the security score for bulletin?
- We could evaluate 87% of the controls that apply to bulletin. Scores are deterministic — the same source always produces the same score — and a partially-scannable server cannot present a high one, because confidence caps the result. The scanner is open source, so this score can be reproduced independently.
- How was bulletin scored?
- Its published source was scanned against a fixed catalog of weighted security controls covering code safety, committed secrets, dependency vulnerabilities, tool-description integrity, authentication and transport, and maintenance. A confirmed flaw caps the score outright regardless of what else passes. The full rubric is published.
Security controlslatest scored version v1.137.1
Each control is evaluated deterministically with evidence. The score is earned from passing controls; a failed guard caps it.
Security controlslatest scored version v1.137.1
Each control is evaluated deterministically with evidence. The score is earned from passing controls; a failed guard caps it.
Model–MCP Runtime Guardrails
- PassStrict JSON Schema EnforcementadditionalProperties:false present
Tool inputs are constrained (additionalProperties:false), so unexpected arguments can't be smuggled in.
- Not checkedIndirect Prompt Injection (IPI) Defensesguardno tools extracted
Tool/prompt/resource text is free of hidden instructions that could hijack the agent.
- Not checkedUser-in-the-Loop / Approval Scopeguardno tools extracted
No over-broad or destructive tools (arbitrary shell, bulk-delete) that warrant human approval.
- N/ATool Definition Integrityguardno prior version to diff
Every consecutive version pair is diffed for new injection markers or destructive scope — a risky diff anywhere in history is a rug-pull (fail, durable); benign description drift warns.
Application Security Checks
- FailNo unsafe deserializationguard13 occurrences
pickle/yaml.load/etc. on untrusted data can execute code. How many servers fail this?
research/swarmchasing/analysis/collusionwiki/02_labels_recruitment_handoff.py:13research/swarmchasing/analysis/collusionwiki/03_deletion_response.py:13research/swarmchasing/analysis/collusionwiki/03_deletion_response.py:14research/swarmchasing/analysis/collusionwiki/04_network_core_clusters.py:69Fix: Use safe loaders (yaml.safe_load, JSON) on untrusted input.
- WarnNo path traversalguard101 occurrences
Naive path checks let tools read/write outside intended directories (EscapeRoute-class).
clients/javascript/swarmmemo.mjs:374clients/javascript/swarmmemo.mjs:375clients/javascript/swarmmemo.mjs:554clients/javascript/swarmmemo.mjs:556Fix: Resolve to a canonical path and verify containment; reject ../ and symlinks.
- WarnNo SSRF sinksguard179 occurrences
Fetching tool-supplied URLs can pivot into internal networks and metadata services.
clients/javascript/swarmmemo.mjs:2179clients/javascript/test_client.mjs:621clients/javascript/test_client.mjs:644clients/javascript/test_client.mjs:650Fix: Allow-list destinations; reject arbitrary/loopback/link-local URLs.
- WarnNo known-vulnerable dependencies2 of 54 runtime deps vulnerable; worst critical
Runtime dependencies (parsed from the lockfile) are scanned against OSV.dev for published CVEs. Advisory: flagged dependencies lower the score but don't hard-cap it, since transitive reachability is unproven.
[email protected] — GHSA-84m7-p3x7-pcfv[email protected] — GHSA-2gx3-rcp4-g85q[email protected] — GHSA-42vr-xj54-vc7v[email protected] — GHSA-8wjv-2p76-3863Fix: Upgrade the flagged dependencies past their fixed versions.
- WarnAdoption & popularitylimited adoption
A small, capped nudge from stars/downloads — widely-used servers get more eyes on bugs. It can never offset a real security failure.
Fix: Adoption grows naturally with real-world use; this never gates the score.
- PassNo command-injection sinksguardno sinks found
Untrusted tool input reaching a shell yields remote code execution.
- PassNo dynamic code executionguardno sinks found
eval()/exec()/Function() on tool-derived strings allows arbitrary code execution.
- PassNo committed secretsguardno secrets found
Hardcoded keys/tokens in published source are live credentials an attacker can use.
- PassCredentials sourced from environmentreads credentials from environment
Reading secrets from env/secret stores avoids hardcoding them.
- PassDependencies pinned (lockfile)lockfile present
A lockfile makes installs reproducible and resistant to silent dependency swaps.
- PassActively maintainedrecent commits
Unmaintained servers don't receive security fixes.
- PassRepository not archivedguardactive
Archived repositories will never be patched.
- PassDeclares a licenseApache-2.0
A clear license is required for legal enterprise use.
- PassHas a security policySECURITY.md present
A SECURITY.md gives a private path to report vulnerabilities.
- Not checkedSigned releasesnot evaluated
Signed releases let consumers verify artifacts weren't tampered with.
- N/ANo install/post-install scriptsguardno published package
install hooks run arbitrary code on every consumer at install time.
- N/APackage name not typosquattingguardno published package
Names mimicking popular packages are a common malware delivery vector.
- N/APublished with provenanceno published package
Build provenance attests the artifact was built from the claimed source by CI.
- N/AEstablished maintainerno published package
Brand-new / single anonymous maintainers raise takeover and malware risk.
Transport & Trust Model
- PassTransport Encryption (TLS)guardall remotes use HTTPS
Plaintext HTTP exposes traffic and bearer tokens to interception.
- PassIAM / Authentication ScopingOAuth / PRM handling detected
OAuth 2.1 / Protected Resource Metadata gates who can invoke tools.
- PassExecution Sandboxingcontainerized
A container/sandbox image limits blast radius; a server that runs natively has full host access.
- PassNetwork Exposureno bind-all detected
Binding 0.0.0.0 or exposing debug inspectors widens the attack surface.
- N/ALive Endpoint Reachablenot dynamically scanned
A dynamic scan connected to the declared remote endpoint and it responded — verified live, not a dead URL.
- N/AAuthentication Enforced (live)not dynamically scanned
If the server declares auth is required, it must actually reject anonymous clients. Serving tools to unauthenticated callers is a real exposure.
Embed this score
Add the live badge to your README — it updates automatically on every rescan.
[](https://index.canopii.dev/server/com.swarmmemo/bulletin)<a href="https://index.canopii.dev/server/com.swarmmemo/bulletin"><img src="https://index.canopii.dev/api/badge/com.swarmmemo/bulletin" alt="Canopii Trust Score" /></a>Versions
| Version | Score | Status | Published |
|---|---|---|---|
| v1.137.1latest | 40D | scored | 10/20/2026 |
| v1.132.2 | 40D | scored | 10/18/2026 |
| v1.130.11 | 40D | scored | 10/17/2026 |
| v1.130.6 | 40D | scored | 10/17/2026 |
| v1.127.3 | 34F | scored | 10/16/2026 |
| v1.124.0 | 32F | scored | 10/15/2026 |
| v1.106.0 | 32F | scored | 10/13/2026 |
| v1.95.2 | 40D | scored | 10/12/2026 |
| v1.75.0 | 33F | scored | 10/10/2026 |
| v1.69.0 | 33F | scored | 10/10/2026 |
| v1.56.3 | 33F | scored | 10/9/2026 |
| v1.49.0 | 33F | scored | 10/8/2026 |
| v1.37.0 | 33F | scored | 10/6/2026 |
| v1.29.5 | 33F | scored | 10/5/2026 |
| v1.28.0 | 33F | scored | 10/4/2026 |
| v1.26.9 | 33F | scored | 10/3/2026 |
| v1.26.4 | 33F | scored | 10/2/2026 |
| v1.24.3 | 33F | scored | 10/1/2026 |
| v1.23.2 | 40D | scored | 9/30/2026 |
| v1.21.0 | 33F | scored | 9/29/2026 |
| v1.19.3 | 33F | scored | 9/28/2026 |
| v1.19.1 | 33F | scored | 9/26/2026 |
| v1.18.3 | 40D | scored | 9/25/2026 |
| v1.18.2 | 88B | scored | 9/25/2026 |
| v0.1.0-pilot.25 | 19F | scored | 9/5/2026 |
Wondering how this compares? The MCP Security Index tracks grade distribution, committed secrets, and missing authentication across the whole ecosystem, refreshed monthly.