Auditon security assessments
REMOTE · AUDITON.CO
Read-only access to your Auditon vulnerability scans: findings, endpoints, reports and changes.
Available components
Last scanned (8 hours ago)
Scores higher than 87% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Security
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security89
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation is enforced on tool calls, but the challenge carries no valid RFC 9728 metadata, so a client cannot discover where to get a token. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability67
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Tool/resource definitions use about 541 tokens (~90/item across 6 items; 6 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management57
- Stability observed for 17 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage93
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 79% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 6 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 7 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (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.
- 4 Nov 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.
- 2 Nov 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.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 37 to 40. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 11 days of observed history at the previous scan, 12 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 29 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 30 to 33. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 9 days of observed history at the previous scan, 10 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 27 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 23 to 27. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 7 days of observed history at the previous scan, 8 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 25 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 17 to 20. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 5 days of observed history at the previous scan, 6 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 22 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 7 to 10. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 2 days of observed history at the previous scan, 3 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 20 Oct 26 +1
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ 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 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://auditon.co/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=auditon.co | CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 20 Sept 2026 | 19 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 578c323287293a57c76c7a0a56ed586f18b |
| SANs: *.auditon.co, auditon.co | ||||||
| CN=YE2,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 4df3b15dd6c0784c507cd37b58e6f115 |
| CN=Root YE,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 872165fc34b6e5fba8add5b3705fb53a |
| CN=ISRG Root X2,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 6c8f1dc727c7117f7baf853ac980f9cd |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of auditon.co. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| co. | present | 7786 | 8 | Verified |
| auditon.co. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication Challenged, unverified
The endpoint asked for a token, but we could not retrieve and validate the RFC 9728 metadata that tells a client how to obtain one.
| Result | Challenged, unverified |
|---|---|
| Enforced | On tool calls |
| HTTP status | 200 |
WWW-Authenticate challenge Bearer realm="auditon"
Bearer realm="auditon"| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=31536000 |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self'; script-src 'self'; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; img-src 'self' data:; object-src 'none'; base-uri 'none'; frame-ancestors 'none'; form-action 'self' |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| referrer-policy | no-referrer |
Protected resource metadata
| Retrieved | No |
|---|---|
| Problem | no_resource_metadata |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://auditon.co/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://auditon.co/mcp | HTTPS enforced |
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 →
compare_scans Compare scans ~92
What changed on an endpoint between two scans: appeared, resolved, not reassessed (the check did not complete, so status is unknown) and severity changes. Without scan ids, compares the endpoint's two most recent scans.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| endpoint | string | yes | Endpoint hostname or IP, as returned by list_endpoints |
| from_scan | string | – | Earlier scan |
| to_scan | string | – | Later scan |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_finding Get finding ~50
Full detail for one finding: description, impact, remediation, references, evidence, analyst decision and its history across scans.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| finding_id | string | yes | finding_id from list_findings or get_report |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_report Get scan report ~106
One scan as structured data: rating, coverage gaps, findings, items requiring verification, accepted risks, dismissed false positives and passed controls. Read "interpretation" before drawing conclusions. Set detail=true for descriptions and remediation.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| detail | boolean | – | Include description, impact, remediation, references and evidence for each finding |
| endpoint | string | – | Limit the report to one endpoint |
| scan_id | string | yes | scan_id (or source_id) as returned by list_scans |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_endpoints List endpoints ~29
Hosts assessed in this workspace, with open findings by severity and the most recent scan. Start here.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_findings List findings ~102
Current findings across all scans, most severe first. Defaults to open findings; potential (unconfirmed) matches are included and marked by assurance.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| endpoint | string | – | Endpoint hostname or IP, as returned by list_endpoints |
| limit | integer | – | – |
| min_severity | string | – | Lowest severity to include |
| since | string | – | Only findings last observed on or after this date (YYYY-MM-DD) |
| state | string | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_scans List scans ~63
Scans, newest first: type, status, rating and coverage. With an endpoint, rating, findings and coverage are for that endpoint only.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| endpoint | string | – | Endpoint hostname or IP, as returned by list_endpoints |
| limit | integer | – | – |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Auditon security assessments MCP server?
Auditon security assessments is a hosted endpoint at https://auditon.co/mcp, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · auditon.co
claude mcp add --transport http co-auditon-assessments 'https://auditon.co/mcp'
What is the Auditon security assessments MCP server?
Auditon security assessments is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as co.auditon/assessments. Read-only access to your Auditon vulnerability scans: findings, endpoints, reports and changes. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://auditon.co/mcp).
Is the Auditon security assessments MCP server safe to use?
Auditon security assessments scores 83 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. 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 Auditon security assessments MCP server expose?
Auditon security assessments exposes 6 tools: list_endpoints, list_scans, get_report, list_findings, get_finding, compare_scans. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 442 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Auditon security assessments MCP server require authentication?
Yes. Auditon security assessments asked us for credentials when we connected, so you will need to authorise it in your MCP client before it can do anything.
Is the Auditon security assessments MCP server still maintained?
Auditon security assessments is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.