CanopiiCanopiiAll serversEnterprise →

hronaut MCP Server Security Report

io.github.hronaut/hronaut

A visible desktop browser for coding agents, with a separate workspace for each project.

Security Trust Score
Grade A · Strong posture
Tier 1 · Public sourceHigh confidence · 98%latest v3.14.8 Repository
Declared MCP capabilities
ResourcesPrompts

Run it securely

Host io.github.hronaut/hronaut in a governed environment — SSO in front, every tool call attributed and audited.

Are you the maintainer?

Verify with GitHub to get alerted whenever hronaut/hronaut changes score — and claim the badge for your README.

Claim this server

The short answer

Is hronaut safe to use?
hronaut scores 91/100 (grade A) on the Canopii Trust Index — strong posture. It passes 16 of the 22 security controls that apply to it, with no confirmed security failures.
How reliable is the security score for hronaut?
We could evaluate 98% of the controls that apply to hronaut. 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 hronaut 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.
Reputation6stars1forks7open issuestodaylast commit<1yage

Security controlslatest scored version v3.14.8

Each control is evaluated deterministically with evidence. The score is earned from passing controls; a failed guard caps it.

Model–MCP Runtime Guardrails

  • Pass
    Indirect Prompt Injection (IPI) Defensesguardno injection markers

    Tool/prompt/resource text is free of hidden instructions that could hijack the agent.

  • Pass
    Strict JSON Schema EnforcementadditionalProperties:false present

    Tool inputs are constrained (additionalProperties:false), so unexpected arguments can't be smuggled in.

  • Pass
    Tool Definition Integrityguardtool definitions stable; no risky changes in version history

    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.

  • Pass
    In-Session Definition Integrityguardno call-gated or call-time tool definition changes

    Tool and prompt definitions stay fixed during a session — they don't change after a few calls, which is how runtime-gated rug-pulls slip past one-time review.

  • Pass
    User-in-the-Loop / Approval Scopeguardno destructive tool scope

    No over-broad or destructive tools (arbitrary shell, bulk-delete) that warrant human approval.

Application Security Checks

  • Warn
    No path traversalguard54 occurrences

    Naive path checks let tools read/write outside intended directories (EscapeRoute-class).

    scripts/capture-marketing-assets.ts:59scripts/discord-release-announcement.ts:12scripts/discord-release-announcement.ts:22scripts/discord-release-announcement.ts:24

    Fix: Resolve to a canonical path and verify containment; reject ../ and symlinks.

  • Warn
    No SSRF sinksguard9 occurrences

    Fetching tool-supplied URLs can pivot into internal networks and metadata services.

    scripts/dialog-integration.ts:93scripts/discord-release-announcement.ts:54scripts/find-release-rehearsal.ts:50scripts/native-packages.ts:207

    Fix: Allow-list destinations; reject arbitrary/loopback/link-local URLs.

  • Warn
    Declares a licenseno recognized license

    A clear license is required for legal enterprise use.

    Fix: Add a recognized SPDX license (MIT, Apache-2.0, …).

  • Warn
    Adoption & 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.

  • Pass
    No command-injection sinksguardno sinks found

    Untrusted tool input reaching a shell yields remote code execution.

  • Pass
    No dynamic code executionguardno sinks found

    eval()/exec()/Function() on tool-derived strings allows arbitrary code execution.

  • Pass
    No unsafe deserializationguardno sinks found

    pickle/yaml.load/etc. on untrusted data can execute code.

  • Pass
    No committed secretsguardno secrets found

    Hardcoded keys/tokens in published source are live credentials an attacker can use.

  • Pass
    Credentials sourced from environmentreads credentials from environment

    Reading secrets from env/secret stores avoids hardcoding them.

  • Pass
    No known-vulnerable dependencies271 runtime deps, no known CVEs

    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.

  • Pass
    Dependencies pinned (lockfile)lockfile present

    A lockfile makes installs reproducible and resistant to silent dependency swaps.

  • Pass
    Actively maintainedrecent commits

    Unmaintained servers don't receive security fixes.

  • Pass
    Repository not archivedguardactive

    Archived repositories will never be patched.

  • Pass
    Has a security policySECURITY.md present

    A SECURITY.md gives a private path to report vulnerabilities.

  • Not checked
    Signed releasesnot evaluated

    Signed releases let consumers verify artifacts weren't tampered with.

  • N/A
    No install/post-install scriptsguardno published package

    install hooks run arbitrary code on every consumer at install time.

  • N/A
    Package name not typosquattingguardno published package

    Names mimicking popular packages are a common malware delivery vector.

  • N/A
    Published with provenanceno published package

    Build provenance attests the artifact was built from the claimed source by CI.

  • N/A
    Established maintainerno published package

    Brand-new / single anonymous maintainers raise takeover and malware risk.

Transport & Trust Model

  • Warn
    Execution Sandboxingruns natively (no container image)

    A container/sandbox image limits blast radius; a server that runs natively has full host access.

    Fix: Ship a Dockerfile/Containerfile (or document a sandboxed run) so the server runs isolated.

  • Pass
    Network Exposureno bind-all detected

    Binding 0.0.0.0 or exposing debug inspectors widens the attack surface.

  • N/A
    Transport Encryption (TLS)guardno remote endpoints

    Plaintext HTTP exposes traffic and bearer tokens to interception.

  • N/A
    IAM / Authentication Scopingno remote endpoints

    OAuth 2.1 / Protected Resource Metadata gates who can invoke tools.

  • N/A
    No Token Passthroughguardno HTTP transport

    The client's token is never forwarded to downstream APIs — the server obtains its own, correctly-scoped credential instead.

  • N/A
    DNS-Rebinding Protectionno HTTP transport

    HTTP endpoints reject requests carrying an unlisted Origin, so a malicious web page can't drive the server through the user's browser.

  • N/A
    Live Endpoint Reachablenot dynamically scanned

    A dynamic scan connected to the declared remote endpoint and it responded — verified live, not a dead URL.

  • N/A
    Authentication 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.

Canopii Trust Score badge preview
markdown[![Canopii Trust Score](https://index.canopii.dev/api/badge/io.github.hronaut/hronaut)](https://index.canopii.dev/server/io.github.hronaut/hronaut)
html<a href="https://index.canopii.dev/server/io.github.hronaut/hronaut"><img src="https://index.canopii.dev/api/badge/io.github.hronaut/hronaut" alt="Canopii Trust Score" /></a>

Versions

VersionScoreStatus
v3.14.8latest91Ascored
v3.14.790Ascored
v3.14.591Ascored
v3.14.091Ascored
v3.12.090Ascored
v3.11.090Ascored
v3.9.091Ascored
v3.5.091Ascored
v3.3.190Ascored
v3.2.090Ascored
v3.0.090Ascored
v2.50.086Bscored
v2.49.086Bscored
v2.41.086Bscored
v2.40.086Bscored
v2.38.092Ascored
v2.30.089Bscored
v2.28.089Bscored
v2.20.086Bscored
v2.18.089Bscored
v2.16.089Bscored
v2.15.086Bscored
v2.14.086Bscored
v2.12.188Bscored
v2.11.686Bscored
v2.11.286Bscored
v2.8.686Bscored
v2.8.288Bscored
v2.7.486Bscored
v2.6.089Bscored
v2.5.2886Bscored
v2.5.2786Bscored
v2.5.1690Ascored
v2.5.789Bscored
v2.5.289Bscored
v2.4.3189Bscored

Wondering how this compares? The MCP Security Index tracks grade distribution, committed secrets, and missing authentication across the whole ecosystem, refreshed monthly.