Dataconto: who buys company records and code
REMOTE · DATACONTO.COM
Who pays owners for company records, code and datasets, closed companies included. Sourced terms.
Available components
Last scanned (11 hours ago)
Scores higher than 69% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Finance and Payments
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 Security74
- 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
- HSTS check failed: the Strict-Transport-Security header is absent. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- 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 Usability76
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 2405 tokens (~185/item across 13 items; 9 tools + 4 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 Management47
- Stability observed for 14 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 9 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 11 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities73
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
- Supports UI / widget rendering.Pass
Checks we ran (14)
- TLS certificate
- Authorization
- HTTPS
- HSTS header
- DNSSEC
- Transport
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
- Capabilities
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 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.
- 3 Nov 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.
- 1 Nov 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.
- 30 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.
- 28 Oct 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- 27 Oct 26 +4
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Schema quality: 270 → 185 ▲ functional
- The server now declares the “resources” capability functional
- First check of Capabilities: pass functional
- First check of Schema quality: 100 functional
- New resource “code-value” functional
- New resource “deletion-clock” functional
- New resource “estimate” functional
- New resource “fit-check” functional
- Server version: 1.0.0 → 1.2.0 functional
- New tool “code_value” functional
- New tool “deletion_clock” functional
- New tool “estimate” functional
- New tool “fit_check” functional
- New tool “rights_check” functional
- 26 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 10 to 13. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 3 days of observed history at the previous scan, 4 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 24 Oct 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Schema quality: 220 → 270 ▼ functional
- New tool “get_tool_terms” 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://dataconto.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=dataconto.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 20 Oct 2026 | 18 Jan 2027 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | 95d87701dcac84d813db1d38f35a66e8 |
| SANs: dataconto.com, connect.dataconto.com, *.connect.dataconto.com | ||||||
| CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) | CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US | 13 Dec 2023 | 20 Feb 2029 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 7ff31977972c224a76155d13b6d685e3 |
| CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) | CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE | 15 Nov 2023 | 28 Jan 2028 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 7fe530bf331343bedd821610493d8a1b |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of dataconto.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | DS published | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| dataconto.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 |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://dataconto.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://dataconto.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://dataconto.com/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 →
code_value Price private code at a buyer's published per-token rates ~217
Counts code the way pre.dev's public script does (code files in full, text files up to 10x the code, minified and bundle-named files skipped, 4 bytes per token) and prices it at Pangea's published non-exclusive list rates per million tokens of source and of git history. Give files (path and size in bytes, e.g. from `git ls-tree -r -l HEAD`), or code_bytes and text_bytes, or source_tokens. History is optional. A list price, not an offer.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| code_bytes | integer | – | Bytes of code files, if you summed them yourself. |
| files | array | – | Files at HEAD, paths relative to the repo root. Skip rules (node_modules, vendor, build output) are applied here. |
| history_tokens | integer | – | Git history tokens, if counted. |
| source_tokens | integer | – | Source tokens, if already counted. |
| text_bytes | integer | – | Bytes of text files (Markdown, JSON, YAML, HTML). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
deletion_clock Last day to export from each business tool ~186
For a company canceling its tools or closing: the last day to export from each tool once the account ends, by plan, from what each vendor's own terms say happens after cancellation (export window in days, kept with no export, or nothing). Each row quotes the vendor's words with the date read. With no plan given, the plan with the shortest window is used and flagged. Tool ids as in get_tool_terms.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| ends | string | – | Day the accounts end, YYYY-MM-DD, between 2000 and 2100. Default today (UTC). |
| plans | object | – | Plan per tool as the vendor spells it, e.g. {"slack": "Pro"}. Keys are tool ids. |
| tools | array | – | Tool ids, e.g. ["slack", "google-workspace", "hubspot"]. Omit for every tool. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
estimate Run three buyers' published payout estimators ~250
What micro1's, Telegraph's and Grepped's own public estimators give for a company's records, from team size, years in business and headquarters (revenue optional, Grepped only). Each range is the buyer's formula, checked against its live page on the date given; none is an offer and Dataconto adds no figure of its own. Pass offer_usd (and offer_from) to place an offer the owner received against each range and the offering buyer's published range. Also returns the other listed buyers these answers don't rule out.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | string | – | Headquarters: us, uk, ca, au, eu4 (Ireland, Netherlands, Germany or France), eu (another EU country), in, sg, other. Default us. |
| offer_from | string | – | Who made the offer. |
| offer_usd | integer | – | An offer the owner received, in US dollars. |
| revenue | string | – | Annual revenue band, Grepped only. Default undisclosed. |
| staff | integer | yes | People now, or at the peak. |
| status | string | – | Default operating. micro1's estimator covers running companies only. |
| years | integer | yes | Years in business. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
fit_check Check which buyers fit a company's records or code ~136
Runs Dataconto's fit check: each listed buyer's published criteria against the owner's answers. Returns, per buyer program, a verdict (strong = every criterion met, possible = none failed but some unknown, none = a criterion failed), each criterion as met, failed or unknown, the reasons for a miss, the buyer's published figure with the date checked and its Dataconto page. Unanswered questions count as unknown; `missing` lists the ones worth asking.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| answers | object | – | Answer what you know; leave the rest out. |
| side | string | yes | company = business records, code = private source code. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_buyer Get one buyer program ~76
One program with its current facts: what it takes, who qualifies, payout, fees, exclusivity, payment timing and process, each quoted from the buyer's page with the date read.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | string | yes | Program id from list_buyers, e.g. "scale-data-partnerships". A company name also works. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_market_facts Dated market facts on data and code buyers ~150
Dated, sourced facts across programs: payout ranges, per-token rates, payout caps, platform fees, payment timing, eligibility. History is kept when a term changes (current=false rows). Press-only figures are flagged with source_type press.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| current | boolean | – | true = only terms in force; false = only superseded ones. |
| field | string | – | Kind of fact. |
| limit | integer | – | Results to return, default 30. |
| program | string | – | Program id from list_buyers. |
| since | string | – | Observed on or after this date, YYYY-MM-DD. |
| source_type | string | – | primary = quoted from the buyer's own page. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_tool_terms What a business tool's terms say about customer data ~349
For business tools companies keep records in (chat, email, tickets, docs, CRM, call recordings, code hosts): who owns the customer's data, whether the vendor trains AI on it (generative and other models, by plan), whether it keeps aggregated use, what can be exported on which plan and by whom, how much history the plan keeps, and how long data stays after cancellation. Each answer is quoted word for word from the vendor's own terms, AI page, data processing addendum or help article, with the date read. "The terms don't say" means every contract was read and none answers; "Not read yet" means a document is still unread. Answers marked inferred are a reading of the text, not its words. Not legal advice.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| answer | string | – | Keep tools whose headline answer has this token, e.g. opt_out with field=ai_training. |
| facts | boolean | – | false = headline answers only, no quoted facts. Default true. |
| field | string | – | One question: ownership, ai_training, aggregate_use, export, retention or after_cancel. |
| limit | integer | – | Tools to return, default 20. |
| plan | string | – | A plan name as the vendor spells it, e.g. "Free", "Enterprise". |
| record_type | string | – | Kind of record: slack-and-teams, email, support-tickets, jira-and-linear, crm, call-recordings, documents-and-sops. |
| tool | string | – | Tool id, e.g. "slack", "microsoft-365", "google-workspace", "salesforce", "notion". Omit to list every tool. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_buyers List who buys company records and code ~225
Programs that pay owners for company records (email, chat, tickets, docs, CRM, databases) or private code, including from closed or winding-down companies. Returns each program's summary, who qualifies, published payout range or rates, countries and its Dataconto page. Programs listed on Dataconto's buyer pages come first.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | string | – | Two-letter ISO 3166 code of the owner's country, e.g. US, GB, DE. Programs with no country limit are included. |
| kind | string | – | pays_owner = the program pays the owner itself; marketplace = it places the data with buyers; invite_only = no open intake. |
| limit | integer | – | Results to return, default 20. |
| listed | boolean | – | true = only programs on Dataconto's buyer pages and fit check. |
| min_payout | integer | – | Only programs whose published payout reaches at least this many US dollars. |
| side | string | – | company = business records, code = private source code. |
| status | string | – | Intake status. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
rights_check Check whether a company's records are ready to license ~300
Dataconto's rights check: from who can sign, customer contracts, personal data, staff and contractor IP and the tools the company uses, a verdict (ready = nothing in the way, work = steps to finish before signing, not_yet = nobody known who can sign for a closing or closed company) and the steps, each with its level (block, work, note, ok) and the Dataconto page that holds its source. Unanswered questions count as not sure and are listed in `missing`. With tools, also returns what each tool's terms say on ownership, export and AI training, each quote dated. Sums up published sources; not legal advice. Tool ids as in get_tool_terms.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| contracts | string | – | Whether any customer contracts limit what the company can do with their data. |
| ip | string | – | Whether staff and contractor agreements assign their work to the company. gaps = not all of them; na = no documents or code in scope. |
| personal | string | – | Personal data in the records. regulated = health or financial records. |
| signer | string | – | Who can sign for the company now. officer = a director or officer; officeholder = an administrator, liquidator or trustee. |
| status | string | yes | operating, closing (winding down) or closed. |
| tools | array | – | Tool ids the company uses, e.g. ["slack", "notion"]. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Dataconto: who buys company records and code MCP server?
Dataconto: who buys company records and code is a hosted endpoint at https://dataconto.com/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 · dataconto.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-dataconto-buyers 'https://dataconto.com/mcp'
What is the Dataconto: who buys company records and code MCP server?
Dataconto: who buys company records and code is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.dataconto/buyers. Who pays owners for company records, code and datasets, closed companies included. Sourced terms. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://dataconto.com/mcp).
Is the Dataconto: who buys company records and code MCP server safe to use?
Dataconto: who buys company records and code scores 77 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 Dataconto: who buys company records and code MCP server expose?
Dataconto: who buys company records and code exposes 9 tools: list_buyers, get_buyer, get_market_facts, get_tool_terms, fit_check, and 4 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,889 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Dataconto: who buys company records and code MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Dataconto: who buys company records and code without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Dataconto: who buys company records and code MCP server still maintained?
Dataconto: who buys company records and code 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 Dataconto: who buys company records and code MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 14 checks on Dataconto: who buys company records and code, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 10 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.