Cyber Library
REMOTE · WWW.CYBERLIBRARY.COM
Search and read Cyber Library, a free structured cybersecurity knowledge base. Read-only, no auth.
Available components
Last scanned (11 hours ago)
Scores higher than 91% 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 Security80
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- No authorisation is required to call this server. Nothing on it is marked destructive, but we can't show that an anonymous caller can only read: full credit needs the server to list at least one tool and every tool to be verifiably read-only. We use a best-effort check of tool names and descriptions to tell read-only tools from tools that change things, so some genuinely read-only tools may not get full credit. Names that start with a read verb (get, list, read, search and similar) and accurate readOnlyHint annotations help. Meet that to earn full credit, or require authorisation. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- 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 Usability75
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 723 tokens (~120/item across 6 items; 6 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management80
- Stability observed for 24 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 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
Checks we ran (13)
- TLS certificate
- Authorization
- HTTPS
- HSTS header
- DNSSEC
- Transport
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
Does not apply to this hosted endpoint (2)
- Supply Chain SecurityScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
- Provenance & TransparencyScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
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.
- 5 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 77 to 80. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 23 days of observed history at the previous scan, 24 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 70 to 73. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 21 days of observed history at the previous scan, 22 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 1 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 67. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 20 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 30 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.
- 27 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 47 to 50. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 14 days of observed history at the previous scan, 15 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 40 to 43. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 12 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.
- 23 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 33 to 37. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 10 days of observed history at the previous scan, 11 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 21 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 27 to 30. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 8 days of observed history at the previous scan, 9 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
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://www.cyberlibrary.com/api/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=*.cyberlibrary.com | CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 12 Oct 2026 | 10 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 5988db983a465583235ffad1c9ca544974f |
| SANs: *.cyberlibrary.com, cyberlibrary.com | ||||||
| CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US (CA) | CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US | 3 Sept 2025 | 2 Sept 2028 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | a20253f15f2691c05dc1ce13b9bcca4e |
| CN=Root YR,O=ISRG,C=US (CA) | CN=ISRG Root X1,O=Internet Security Research Group,C=US | 13 May 2026 | 2 Sept 2032 | RSA 4096 | SHA256-RSA | f24b6d17f9d9ad7cb1c9fea78782699f |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of www.cyberlibrary.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | DS published | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| cyberlibrary.com. | No DS | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://www.cyberlibrary.com/api/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://www.cyberlibrary.com/api/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://www.cyberlibrary.com/api/mcp |
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 →
get_outline Outline of a branch ~104
Indented outline of the library tree below a path (default: whole library) down to a given depth. Useful to understand how a domain is organized before reading pages. Capped at 400 entries. Docs: https://www.cyberlibrary.com/en/mcp
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| depth | integer | – | Levels to include, default 2 |
| locale | string | – | Locale code, default "en" |
| path | string | – | Branch path; omit for the whole library |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_page Read a library page ~122
Returns a page of the Cyber Library as markdown with its metadata (title, URL, breadcrumbs, last update, contributors) and, for folders, the list of child pages. Paths look like "offensive/software/applications/server/containers/container-escape"; full URLs are accepted. Docs: https://www.cyberlibrary.com/en/mcp
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| locale | string | – | Locale code, default "en" |
| max_chars | integer | – | Truncate the body after this many characters (default: no limit) |
| path | string | yes | Page path or URL |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_planned_subtree Planned subtree ~91
Outline of the planned taxonomy below a topic id (from search_planned_topics; omit for the Cyber root) with each topic's kind and status. Capped at 400 entries. Docs: https://www.cyberlibrary.com/en/mcp
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| depth | integer | – | Levels to include, default 2 |
| topic_id | integer | – | Topic id; omit for the Cyber root |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_topics List the children of a topic ~91
Lists the direct children of a folder of the library (or the six top-level sections when no path is given): title, path, number of sub-pages and description. Docs: https://www.cyberlibrary.com/en/mcp
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| locale | string | – | Locale code, default "en" |
| path | string | – | Folder path, e.g. "offensive/software"; omit for the top level |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_library Search the Cyber Library ~107
Full-text search over the published pages of cyberlibrary.com (titles, descriptions, paths). Returns the best matches with their path and URL; pass a path to get_page to read it. Docs: https://www.cyberlibrary.com/en/mcp
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | Max results, default 10 |
| locale | string | – | Locale code, default "en" |
| query | string | yes | Search terms, e.g. "kerberoasting" or "container escape" |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_planned_topics Search the planned taxonomy ~117
Searches the structure database snapshot of the Cyber taxonomy: every planned topic (8k+), including drafts not yet published on the site, with its status (draft, review, ready, generated, published) and position. Use get_planned_subtree with an id to explore around a match. Docs: https://www.cyberlibrary.com/en/mcp
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | integer | – | Max results, default 15 |
| query | string | yes | Title search terms |
| status | string | – | Only topics with this status |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Cyber Library MCP server?
Cyber Library is a hosted endpoint at https://www.cyberlibrary.com/api/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 · www.cyberlibrary.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-cyberlibrary-library 'https://www.cyberlibrary.com/api/mcp'
What is the Cyber Library MCP server?
Cyber Library is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.cyberlibrary/library. Search and read Cyber Library, a free structured cybersecurity knowledge base. Read-only, no auth. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://www.cyberlibrary.com/api/mcp).
Is the Cyber Library MCP server safe to use?
Cyber Library scores 85 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 Cyber Library MCP server expose?
Cyber Library exposes 6 tools: search_library, get_page, list_topics, get_outline, search_planned_topics, get_planned_subtree. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 632 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Cyber Library MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Cyber Library without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Cyber Library MCP server still maintained?
Cyber Library 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.
What did VerifyMCP test on the Cyber Library MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 13 checks on Cyber Library, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 9 more. Supply Chain Security and Provenance & Transparency do not apply to a hosted endpoint, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.