io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner
NPM · @GUARDBEE/MCP-PROMPT-LEAK-SCANNER
Catches leaked credentials and PII in outbound LLM prompts
Available components
Last scanned (3 hours ago)
Scores higher than 92% of npm servers
Category Security
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Supply Chain Security98
- No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
- 31 of 94 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency97
- Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
- Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to GuardBee/guardbee-mcp). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 1 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability80
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 355 tokens (~71/item across 5 items; 5 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management63
- Stability observed for 19 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 16 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 57 to 60. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 17 days of observed history at the previous scan, 18 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 14 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 12 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 43 to 47. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 days of observed history at the previous scan, 14 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 11 Oct 26 +3
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 days of observed history at the previous scan, 13 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 4 Oct 26 0
- Known CVEs: partial → pass ▲ security
- Dependency health: partial → 0.85 functional
- 3 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 2 Oct 26 +11
- Known CVEs: pass → partial ▼ security
- Provenance: fail → pass ▲ security
- The attested source repository moved: GuardBee/guardbee-mcp security
- Dependency health: 0.85 → partial functional
- Package version: 0.1.5 → 0.1.6 functional
- 1 Oct 26 +11
- Known CVEs: unverified → pass ▲ security
- Dependency health: unverified → 0.85 ▲ functional
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 17 Oct 2026 · Analysed npm/@guardbee/mcp-prompt-leak-scanner@0.1.6
Provenance Verified
A signed build attestation was found and verified, binding this exact artifact to the source repository it claims to come from.
| Result | Verified |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | npm |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | GuardBee/guardbee-mcp |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/GuardBee/guardbee-mcp/.github/workflows/release.yml@refs/heads/main |
| Rekor log index | 3055838262 |
| Predicate type | SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha512:538863b1ca365f27d41cac49e7c134daa7ed7ae5fbd673bfe10d06fe083f0b3726f251174b1be7ecba8ca883f13526df7a54fd04c49db0e0e0cf32c14 |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Dependencies 94 packages
| Packages resolved | 94 |
|---|---|
| Stale | 31 |
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
list_patterns ~23
List every credential/PII pattern this scanner detects, grouped by category
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_directory ~98
Recursively scan a directory of prompt logs or request-body fixtures for leaked credentials and PII
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| exclude | array | – | Skip files/dirs whose path contains one of these strings |
| include | array | – | Only scan files whose path contains one of these strings |
| maxFiles | integer | – | Maximum number of files to scan (default: 5000) |
| path | string | yes | Absolute or relative path to the directory to scan |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_file ~52
Scan a single file — plain text, or a JSON chat-request-body fixture (auto-detected) — for leaked credentials and PII
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | string | yes | Absolute or relative path to the file to scan |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_messages ~87
Scan an OpenAI/Anthropic-style chat request body (a JSON object with a `messages` array and/or a `system` field) for leaked credentials and PII in every message's text content, before it would be sent to the model.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | object | yes | The chat request body object, e.g. { model, system, messages: [{ role, content }] } |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
scan_text ~95
Scan a raw text string (e.g. a prompt you're about to send to an LLM) for leaked credentials (API keys, private keys, JWTs) and PII (TC Kimlik No, credit card, IBAN, email, phone) — checksum-validated where applicable to keep false positives low.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | string | yes | The text to scan |
| label | string | – | Optional label shown in findings |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner MCP server?
io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y @guardbee/mcp-prompt-leak-scanner. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
npm · @guardbee/mcp-prompt-leak-scanner
claude mcp add 4hmetuyar-prompt-leak-scanner -- npx -y @guardbee/mcp-prompt-leak-scanner
What is the io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner MCP server?
io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner. Catches leaked credentials and PII in outbound LLM prompts. This page covers its npm package (@guardbee/mcp-prompt-leak-scanner).
Is the io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner MCP server safe to use?
io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner scores 90 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 17 October 2026. It declares no install or post-install scripts. Its build provenance is signed and verified. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner MCP server expose?
io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner exposes 5 tools: scan_text, scan_messages, scan_file, scan_directory, list_patterns. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 355 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner MCP server still maintained?
io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 17 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.
What licence is the io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner MCP server under?
io.github.4hmetuyar/prompt-leak-scanner declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.