Skip to content
verify mcp Beta VerifyMCP is currently in beta. If you notice any issues, get in touch and we’ll put it right.

vulntel

REMOTE · MCP.VULNTEL.COM

Free hosted CVE intel for bug-bounty agents: CVE fact-check, attack approaches from paid H1 reports

Available components

66 Trust /100

Last scanned (3 hours ago)

Scores higher than 52% of remote servers

Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.

Category Security

Trust breakdown (7 categories)

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
Transport & Reachability100
Schema Quality & AI Usability57
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
  • Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 4735 tokens (~364/item across 13 items; 13 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 Management7
  • Stability observed for 2 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage67
  • 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
  • 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
Tool Safety100
  • No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
  • We read all 13 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 14 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
Changelog

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
    • The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
    • Tool “assist_submission” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “check_technology” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “find_attack_approaches” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “find_continuations” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “search_public_code” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Tool “search_vulns” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
    • Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
    • Server version: 1.30.0 → 1.2.0 functional
    • Tool “assist_submission” changed its title: Strengthen a bug-bounty submission cosmetic
    • Tool “check_technology” changed its title: CVEs for a product and version cosmetic
    • Tool “corpus_stats” changed its title: Corpus size and freshness cosmetic
    • Tool “enrich_cve” changed its title: Enrich a CVE cosmetic
    • Tool “find_attack_approaches” changed its title: Find attack approaches from disclosed bounty reports cosmetic
    • Tool “find_continuations” changed its title: Next moves from a hunt position cosmetic
    • Tool “hunt_plan” changed its title: Rank a recon'd stack into a dig order cosmetic
    • Tool “new_in_scope” changed its title: What newly entered bug-bounty scope cosmetic
    • Tool “observe” changed its title: Scan a host's exposed stack cosmetic
    • Tool “program_outcome_prior” changed its title: What lands on a bounty program cosmetic
    • Tool “search_public_code” changed its title: Find public copies of a code string cosmetic
    • Tool “search_vulns” changed its title: Search CVEs by concept, keyword or seed CVE cosmetic
    • Tool “verify_cve_claim” changed its title: Fact-check a CVE claim cosmetic
  • 3 Nov 26 65

    First indexed and scored.

Diagnostics

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://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp

TLS valid

Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .

Subject Issuer Valid from Valid until Key Signature Serial
CN=vulntel.com CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US 11 Sept 2026 10 Dec 2026 ECDSA 256 ECDSA-SHA256 6e0521a2899d0b460e2f7f0d5948e6b5
SANs: vulntel.com, *.vulntel.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 mcp.vulntel.com. — Not signed

Zone DS Keys Algorithms Outcome
. trust_anchor 20326, 38696 8, 8 Verified
com. present 19718 13 Verified
vulntel.com. absent 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://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp Verified 200
http (plaintext) http://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp HTTPS enforced 301 https://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp
MCP tools · 13 exposed · ~4,318 tokens

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 →

Tool Tokens
assist_submission ~252

Submission & escalation co-pilot for a bug-bounty finding. Paste your DRAFT finding (and what you already tried / couldn't achieve) and get a grounded brief built from the closest REAL disclosed reports: (1) precedent & validity — is this an accepted class, with citable reports (ammunition if it was disputed/closed); (2) what's novel/stronger about yours — what to lead with; (3) an escalation playbook INCLUDING moves you may NOT have tried, each with honest feasibility; (4) submission-framing tips. Every cited report URL is validated against the retrieved corpus — ungrounded citations are flagged in 'citations.ungrounded' with 'citations_grounded=false', so the brief can't smuggle in a fabricated precedent (this guards the citations only — never read it as a verdict on whether your finding itself is real). Optional 'query' overrides the retrieval text (default: the finding itself); limit (default 15) caps the prior-art reports. Complements find_attack_approaches (which returns the raw prior-art cards).

NameTypeReqDescription
findingstringyes–
limitinteger––
query–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

check_technology ~638

Find vulnerabilities affecting a product across NVD (CPE) and OSV (package ecosystems), de-duplicated and ranked by priority/EPSS/CVSS. Distinct products that share a name are kept distinct. If one name maps to several VENDORS' unrelated products (e.g. "Sentry" → sentry, mobileiron, apache; "Envoy" → envoyproxy, enphase), the result is flagged `ambiguous` with `distinct_vendors` — pass `vendor=` to disambiguate. Always check each result's `match.products` (vendor:product) before trusting a hit. Distro builds: pass a banner or distro package version as-is ("OpenSSH_9.2p1 Debian-2+deb12u3", version="1:9.2p1-2+deb12u3", "nginx/1.22.1 (Debian)", "openssh (Alpine 3.20)" + "9.7_p1-r4", "OpenSSH_8.9p1 Ubuntu-3ubuntu0.10", "nginx/1.18.0 (Ubuntu)"). Each result then also gets `distro_fix`: Debian's / Ubuntu's / Alpine's own fixed build and, when your build is known, whether it is past it (distros backport fixes without changing the upstream version, so the upstream `affected` can say vulnerable on a patched host). Ubuntu banners don't name the release: `distro_context.release_basis` says how it was placed. Statuses: fixed / affected / unfixed / not_listed (the distro's record for the CVE lists other packages, not yours); CVEs the distro settled for your build rank after the rest. Read with each verdict: `affected.sources_disagree` (records disagree on whether your version is in range), `affected.ranges_belong_to` (the ranges are a separate component's own versions, e.g. a provider package: unconfirmed for yours), and a top-level `truncated` when a big product matches more records than are considered (exploited ones are always kept). Args: product: product or package name, e.g. "nginx", "Keycloak", "mlflow", "lodash", or a server banner. version: optional exact version (e.g. "1.18.0", or a distro package build) — filters to vulns whose affected range (CPE or package) includes it. ecosystem: optional package ecosystem filter, e.g. "Py…

NameTypeReqDescription
ecosystem–––
limitinteger––
productstringyes–
vendor–––
version–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

corpus_stats ~27

Corpus size and data freshness (CVE / KEV / EPSS counts and latest timestamps).

Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

enrich_cve ~139

Full intelligence for a single CVE: CVSS, KEV status, EPSS, CISA SSVC (exploitation/automatable/technical_impact), P1-P4 priority with rationale, affected products/versions, Debian/Ubuntu/Alpine fixed builds per release (`distro_fixes`), and (live) public-exploit signal. Args: cve_id: e.g. "CVE-2025-12345". include_poc: also query GitHub for public PoC/exploit repos (live).

NameTypeReqDescription
cve_idstringyes–
include_pocboolean––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

find_attack_approaches ~492

Find how bugs *like this* were actually FOUND — retrieve real disclosed bug-bounty report mechanic-cards whose approach is closest (by mechanism) to your query or a seed CVE. The "what approach worked on a bug like this, on which program, and what did it pay" layer: grounded in real publicly-disclosed, paid HackerOne reports, each distilled to a transferable mechanic (bug_class / source / sink / trigger / impact) and embedded in the same space as the corpus. Use it to BORROW a proven attack approach for a target or CVE you're working — especially to get UNSTUCK: results are novelty-ranked to surface non-obvious moves over the common playbook. Give EITHER: query: a free-text approach/bug description, e.g. "SSRF via webhook URL to cloud metadata", "IDOR swapping an object id to read another tenant's data". cve_id: a seed CVE you're working — returns the human attack approaches that transfer to it. Optional: limit (default 10) caps the cards; bug_class filter (e.g. "SSRF") sharpens precision; days filters by disclosure recency; tried=["IDOR","XSS","SSRF"] = bug-classes you've ALREADY attempted: cards of those classes (and their common aliases, IDOR = object-level auth) are left out and near-synonyms pushed down, so you get the nearest approaches you HAVEN'T thought of (the "I've exhausted the obvious, what else?" move). capec="CAPEC-664" = constrain to a canonical attack-pattern class (CAPEC). Pass it ALONE (no query/cve) to pull the real disclosed mechanics for that pattern, ranked by bounty — the coverage-driven "give me proven moves for this attack class" retrieval. Each result carries its canonical 'capec' class(es), the transferable 'trigger', the program, the bounty paid, and whether that program is still active/in-scope. Complements search_vulns (CVEs by mechanism).

NameTypeReqDescription
bug_class–––
capec–––
cve_id–––
days–––
limitinteger––
query–––
tried–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

find_continuations ~358

When you're STUCK mid-hunt: describe your POSITION — the attacker state/capabilities you hold, stripped of product names — and get the CONTINUATIONS that worked from positions like it, matched against the full disclosed-report BODIES (the concrete step/payload/precondition), not just the distilled card. This is the "I have a messy pile of capabilities, what are my legal moves?" layer. position: a product-free statement of what you can already do, e.g. "a backend fetches a user-supplied URL during import/webhook and I can't read the response (blind)", or "I hold a low-priv token and can store config that is later rendered to an admin". The richer/sharper the position, the better — vague positions retrieve generic moves. Optional program: restrict to one program's reports (substring match on handle); limit (default 10) caps the moves. Returns concrete 'move_step' techniques from real reports — including non-obvious cross-class moves the by-card layer can't surface (e.g. credential-leak-on-redirect, request-smuggling desync). HARD CONTRACT: every result is status=UNVERIFIED — a LEGAL MOVE, never a confirmed bug. Each carries a 'decisive_check' you must verify against the target (read its code / fire a test) before claiming anything; the corpus generates the move, the TARGET decides if it survives. Complements find_attack_approaches (by-card mechanism) — this is the by-step, full-body layer.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitinteger––
positionstringyes–
program–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

hunt_plan ~272

Turn a recon'd stack into a ranked dig-order for authorized bug-hunting. For each discovered component, returns its top high-risk CVEs (KEV / CISA-SSVC- active / high-EPSS first) AND its `recurring_loci` — the bug classes (CWE) this product family repeatedly fails at, ranked by real in-the-wild exploitation — i.e. WHERE to look first and WHAT shape to expect. Components are ordered by their most-exploitable bug (`dig_rank`). Grounded in exploitation data, not model guesses; lays out facts for triage/where-to-look, never a payload. Banners go in verbatim ("OpenSSH_9.2p1 Debian-2+deb12u3", "Apache/2.4.62 (Debian)"): a Debian/Ubuntu/Alpine build adds `distro_fix`, and CVEs the distro already fixed in that build rank below the rest. Args: technologies: discovered stack, e.g. ["craftcms 4.4", "nginx", "keycloak"]. per_tech: how many top CVEs to surface per component (default 4).

NameTypeReqDescription
per_techinteger––
technologiesarrayyes–

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

new_in_scope ~458

Find FRESH attack surface: bounty-eligible assets that entered a public bug-bounty program's scope in the last `days` (HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack, mirrored daily), the least-hunted surface there is. Raw scope additions are mostly not new (in one week 57 of 80 were re-added after a removal), so each asset is checked against its program's own scope history: you get `new_asset` (never in this program's scope before) and `new_program` (the whole program first appeared in the window: a launch or a first public listing) assets; re-added, renamed and redacted ones are only counted in `filtered_out`. Additions only: removals are not listed. Per asset: `in_scope_since`, max severity, the host and its cached `stack` if observe has fingerprinted it (else a `stack_note` saying to call observe), and for a single GitHub repo its `repo_advisories` (advisories found under the repo name: a name match, check match.products; recent ones are variant-hunting seeds). Per program: platform, max bounty, safe harbor, and its HackerOne disclosed-report history (top classes, last disclosure; null on other platforms, where we hold none). Facts, not a ranking: you decide what is worth hunting. Hunt only programs you are enrolled in and follow each program's rules. Then: observe(host) for the stack, program_outcome_prior(program) for what lands there. Args: days: look-back window, 1-90 (default 7). platform: hackerone | bugcrowd | intigriti | yeswehack. asset_type: url | wildcard | api | source (code repositories) | mobile | other ... program: program handle or name, substring match (e.g. "openai", "cloudflare"). limit: max assets returned (default 50); `count` says how many qualified.

NameTypeReqDescription
asset_type–––
daysinteger––
limitinteger––
platform–––
program–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

observe ~315

Scan a host's exposed stack and join it to the CVE corpus — the recon workhorse. Fingerprints the homepage + JS bundles (recovering the backend identity and API endpoints homepage detection misses on SPAs), then ranks against live KEV / SSVC-active / high-EPSS into a dig-order. Fetches only public pages — authorized targets only. NON-BLOCKING: a scan takes ~1-4 min, so observe() never waits on it. A recent scan (<24h) returns status="ready" instantly. A cache miss KICKS a background scan and returns status="scanning" immediately — POLL by calling observe() again with the same host until it returns status="ready". Returns: - status="ready": host stack + endpoints + dig_order + top_across_stack (the scan result), plus bounty_programs: public programs whose current scope lists this host. - status="scanning": retry_after_seconds + last_scanned_at (call again after that delay). - status="error": a guard/validation error. Args: host: hostname or URL in an authorized bounty scope, e.g. "auth.example.com". fresh: force a re-scan (kicks a new background scan even if a recent one exists). per_tech: top CVEs to surface per component (default 4).

NameTypeReqDescription
freshboolean––
hoststringyes–
per_techinteger––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

program_outcome_prior ~256

At the START of an engagement on a bug-bounty PROGRAM, get a grounded prior over what bug classes have historically LANDED there — to decide what to look at first and what to skip. Built from real HackerOne disclosed reports: the class distribution for this program, each with LIFT over the global base-rate, sample size, and cited example reports; plus `lands_rarely` — the classes that land broadly across programs but almost never here (where NOT to spend the first hour). DESCRIPTIVE, not predictive: it reports what *landed*, never claims what you *will* find. It's a disclosure-selected sample, HackerOne-only (~379 programs with public disclosures), models bug-class not payout, and withholds a prior when the program has too few reports (an anecdote isn't a distribution). Pass a program handle or name, e.g. "gitlab", "shopify". Complements find_attack_approaches (mechanism transfer) and hunt_plan (CVE dig-order) — this is the minute-zero "where to start" prior an agent has no tacit target knowledge to form on its own.

NameTypeReqDescription
programstringyes–

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

search_public_code ~172

Search public repositories for an exact code string; return WHERE it appears. Use it to hunt vendored / copy-pasted copies of known-vulnerable code: search a distinctive line or symbol from the vulnerable function, then FETCH AND READ the hits to judge which copies are still unpatched, reachable, or just fossils/forks. Returns RAW search results only -- it makes no vulnerability judgment; that reasoning is yours. Args: code: an exact code string, e.g. "VP8LBuildHuffmanTable" or a distinctive line. lang: language filter for the code search (default "c"). limit: max hits to return (default 50).

NameTypeReqDescription
codestringyes–
langstring––
limitinteger––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

search_vulns ~542

Search the CVE corpus — one entry point, three retrieval modes picked from your arguments: - query= a concept / technique / weakness (e.g. "SSO SAML assertion replay", "deserialization gadget chain", "server-side request forgery cloud metadata"). By default it FUSES full-text keyword search AND semantic mechanism-search, so you don't have to guess whether your phrasing is lexical or conceptual. order='relevance' = keyword only; order='similarity' = semantic only; order='severity' = fuse then rank P1>P4. - cve_id= a seed CVE (e.g. "CVE-2021-44228") -> its mechanism-siblings across OTHER products (the "what else looks like this?" move). - days= and/or product= (with NO query) -> the recent high-risk window (KEV / P1-P2 / high-EPSS); product= is CPE-name-resolved and each hit carries match.products. "Recent" = published in the window OR added to CISA KEV in it (an old CVE newly confirmed exploited counts); each hit says which (in_window / kev_added). A recency phrase inside query ("this week", "in the last 30 days", "today") is read as days=; `interpreted_as` says how the query was read. Returns ranked cards (each with priority/KEV/EPSS/CWE) + total_matches for coverage; the 'mode' field reports which retrieval ran. You decide which matches matter. (For one product's version-resolved vulns use check_technology, for a whole stack hunt_plan; for how bugs like this were FOUND in disclosed reports use find_attack_approaches.) Args: query: free-text concept / keyword / CWE. cve_id: seed CVE for semantic mechanism-sibling search. cwe: optional weakness filter, e.g. "CWE-502" or "502". days: window in days: published OR added to CISA KEV within it. product: product filter for the recent-window mode (CPE-name-resolved, carries provenance). order: relevance | similarity | severity (default: fused when query is text). limit: max r…

NameTypeReqDescription
cve_id–––
cwe–––
days–––
limitinteger––
order–––
product–––
query–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

verify_cve_claim ~397

Fact-check a claim about a CVE against the corpus — catch hallucinations before they ship. Verifies: does the CVE exist; does it affect the claimed product at the claimed version; is the severity right; is it actually KEV-exploited. Returns per-assertion verdicts (supported / refuted / unverifiable) with cited evidence. Use it to check what another agent (or a draft report) asserted, e.g. "Spring4Shell (CVE-2022-22965) is critical, actively exploited, and affects Spring 5.3.18" → verify_cve_claim("CVE-2022-22965", product="spring framework", version="5.3.18", severity="critical", exploited=True) (the version claim is refuted: fixed in 5.3.18). A distro build as product/version ("OpenSSH_9.2p1 Debian-2+deb12u3", or version "1:9.2p1-2+deb12u3") adds a second assertion with the distro's own verdict for that build. A CNA-rejected id comes back exists=true with rejected=true: treat any claim citing it as unsupported. Args: cve_id: the CVE/GHSA/PYSEC id being claimed about. product / version: optional — checks the affected-version claim in range. severity: optional — a CVSS number ("9.8") or label ("critical"/"high"/…). exploited: optional bool — the "actively exploited / in KEV" claim. claim: optional free text — returns evidence (summary, CWE) for you to judge.

NameTypeReqDescription
claim–––
cve_idstringyes–
exploited–––
product–––
severity–––
version–––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the vulntel MCP server?

vulntel is a hosted endpoint at https://mcp.vulntel.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 · mcp.vulntel.com

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add --transport http com-vulntel-mcp 'https://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp'
Common questions

What is the vulntel MCP server?

vulntel is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.vulntel/mcp. Free hosted CVE intel for bug-bounty agents: CVE fact-check, attack approaches from paid H1 reports. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp).

Is the vulntel MCP server safe to use?

vulntel scores 66 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 vulntel MCP server expose?

vulntel exposes 13 tools: enrich_cve, check_technology, hunt_plan, observe, search_vulns, and 8 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 4,318 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Does the vulntel MCP server require authentication?

No. We connected to vulntel without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.

Is the vulntel MCP server still maintained?

vulntel 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.