io.github.noisy/noisy-coding
OCI · DOCKER.IO/NOISY/NOISY-CODING:2.13.3
Voice interface for Claude Code: talk to your agent and it talks back while it works.
Available components
Last scanned (2 hours ago)
Scores higher than 6% of OCI servers
Category Developer Tools
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 Security0
- No malware scan is available for this kind of package: the supply-chain vendors we use do not cover it. This is a permanent gap in our coverage, not a finding about the package.Unverified
- Known CVEs could not be checked: this image's dependency list comes from an SBOM its publisher attached, which nothing verifies, so we will not report it as a clean result. View diagnostics → Unverified
- Install-script risk not yet assessed.Unverified
- Dependency health could not be checked: this image's dependency list comes from an SBOM its publisher attached. It names packages and versions but not whether each is deprecated, still maintained or linked to its source, so there is nothing we can fairly grade.Unverified
Provenance & Transparency19
- Repository check failed: the declared repository URL redirects; it must resolve directly. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Provenance check failed: no build-provenance attestation is published. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 62 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability0
- Schema quality not yet verified: our sandbox could not run this package, so we have no schema to assess.Unverified
Stability & Change Management0
- Stability not yet verified: our sandbox could not run this package, so we have no schema to compare.Unverified
Tool Coverage0
- Tool coverage not yet verified: our sandbox could not run this package, so we have no tool definitions to assess.Unverified
Tool Safety0
- Tool safety not yet verified: our sandbox could not run this package, so we have no tool text to scan.Unverified
Capabilities0
- Protocol version not yet verified: our sandbox could not run this package, so we never saw its MCP handshake.Unverified
Unverified: 6 categories
Categories scored 0 because we could not verify them: a data source with nothing on this package, evidence we could not reach, or a check we could not run. We only credit what we can confirm.
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.
- 13 Oct 26 0
- Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
- 12 Oct 26 0
- Provenance: fail → unverified ▼ security
- 1 Oct 26 0
- Provenance: unverified → fail ▼ security
- 30 Sept 26 0
- Provenance: fail → unverified ▼ security
- 28 Sept 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 25 Sept 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 14 Sept 26 0
- Source repository: pass → fail ▼ security
- 1 Sept 26 0
- Security disclosure: unverified → fail ▼ 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 19 Oct 2026 · Analysed oci/docker.io/noisy/noisy-coding:2.13.3
Provenance No attestation
The registry publishes no build provenance for this version, so there is nothing to verify.
| Result | No attestation |
|---|---|
| Ecosystem | oci |
| Reason | No attestation published |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Vulnerabilities 47 ungraded findings
From the publisher's SBOM, not graded. These advisories match packages listed in the SBOM the publisher attached to this image. A publisher naming a vulnerable package in their own image is credible, so we show them. Nothing verifies that SBOM, though, so the Known CVEs signal does not grade the image from it.
| ID | CVE | Severity | Vector | Fix available |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GHSA-3w57-8xmc-8v26 | CVE-2026-63349 | high | yes | |
| GHSA-5p39-cfhj-2xmp | CVE-2026-64847 | medium | yes | |
| GHSA-82r6-8w77-94w6 | CVE-2026-63374 | critical | yes | |
| PYSEC-2026-4023 | CVE-2026-63349 | none | yes | |
| PYSEC-2026-4024 | CVE-2026-64847 | none | yes | |
| PYSEC-2026-4025 | CVE-2026-63374 | none | yes | |
| GHSA-g6cj-pr64-35w5 | CVE-2026-69247 | high | yes | |
| PYSEC-2026-3552 | CVE-2026-69247 | none | yes | |
| GHSA-84m7-p3x7-pcfv | CVE-2026-59951 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
| GHSA-58qw-9mgm-455v | CVE-2026-3219 | medium | yes | |
| GHSA-6vgw-5pg2-w6jp | CVE-2026-1703 | low | yes | |
| GHSA-jp4c-xjxw-mgf9 | CVE-2026-6357 | medium | yes | |
| GHSA-qwm4-qh6w-59xr | CVE-2026-13346 | medium | yes | |
| GHSA-wf93-45jw-7689 | CVE-2026-8643 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-1796 | CVE-2026-1703 | none | yes | |
| PYSEC-2026-196 | CVE-2026-8643 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-2875 | CVE-2026-3219 | none | yes | |
| PYSEC-2026-2876 | CVE-2026-6357 | none | yes | |
| PYSEC-2026-3721 | CVE-2026-13346 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-2gx3-rcp4-g85q | CVE-2026-101917 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L | yes |
| GHSA-42vr-xj54-vc7v | CVE-2026-101918 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L | yes |
| GHSA-8wjv-2p76-3863 | CVE-2026-102265 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L | yes |
| GHSA-9j54-fg26-wv3r | CVE-2026-102266 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-9v7f-9g4p-ffgj | CVE-2026-102267 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-ffc3-869f-jxw9 | CVE-2026-102268 | critical | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-gvp8-978c-rx2q | CVE-2026-103001 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N | no |
| GHSA-hxm8-2xgr-2p9m | CVE-2026-102269 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-jwrc-g2q2-pq5p | CVE-2026-102270 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
| GHSA-p4g4-x82p-q773 | CVE-2026-102271 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-r6x4-923q-g947 | CVE-2026-102272 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-w2cx-738m-mc7w | CVE-2026-102273 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| GHSA-w6j9-cwv2-h6wq | CVE-2026-102274 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
| GHSA-x33g-cr3x-6449 | CVE-2026-102275 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4140 | CVE-2026-101917 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4141 | CVE-2026-101918 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4142 | CVE-2026-102265 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4143 | CVE-2026-102266 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4144 | CVE-2026-102267 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4145 | CVE-2026-102268 | critical | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4146 | CVE-2026-103001 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N | no |
| PYSEC-2026-4147 | CVE-2026-102269 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4148 | CVE-2026-102270 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4149 | CVE-2026-102271 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4150 | CVE-2026-102272 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4151 | CVE-2026-102273 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4152 | CVE-2026-102274 | medium | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H | yes |
| PYSEC-2026-4183 | CVE-2026-102275 | high | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N | yes |
Background: What a vulnerability scan can and cannot prove →
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 →
Tools for package channels are captured by running the package in an isolated sandbox. Our sandbox could not run this package, so no tool list has been captured. That is a gap on our side, not a finding about the package.
Add this component to your MCP client. Where a client-specific snippet is available, pick your client below and copy it straight into your config; otherwise use the connection detail shown.
oci · docker.io/noisy/noisy-coding:2.13.3
What is the io.github.noisy/noisy-coding MCP server?
io.github.noisy/noisy-coding is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.noisy/noisy-coding. Voice interface for Claude Code: talk to your agent and it talks back while it works. This page covers its container image (docker.io/noisy/noisy-coding:2.13.3).
Is the io.github.noisy/noisy-coding MCP server safe to use?
io.github.noisy/noisy-coding scores 4 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. The SBOM its publisher attached lists packages with 47 known advisories as of 19 October 2026. We do not grade that SBOM, as nothing verifies it. 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.
Is the io.github.noisy/noisy-coding MCP server still maintained?
io.github.noisy/noisy-coding is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 19 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.noisy/noisy-coding MCP server under?
io.github.noisy/noisy-coding declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.