io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody
REMOTE · PROOFOFCUSTODY.IO
Bitcoin custody scores, failure registry, ETF custody, stablecoin and x402 data, source router.
Available components
Last scanned (6 hours ago)
Scores higher than 58% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Crypto and Web3
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 Security63
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- Authorisation not fully verified: no authorisation is required to call this server, and 17 tool(s) never declared a destructiveHint. The MCP spec treats an absent hint as destructive by default, so we cannot call this surface safe. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Unverified
- 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 Usability74
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 2367 tokens (~139/item across 17 items; 17 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 Management53
- Stability observed for 16 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 17 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 18 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities60
- Spec-recency check failed: implements MCP spec 2025-06-18; the latest is 2026-07-28. See how to fix → Fail
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.
- 3 Nov 26 +1
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Schema quality: 1921 → 2367 ▼ functional
- New tool “fit_custody_setup” functional
- New tool “route_question” functional
- 31 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.
- 29 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.
- 27 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 20 to 23. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 6 days of observed history at the previous scan, 7 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 13 to 17. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 4 days of observed history at the previous scan, 5 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 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.
- 21 Oct 26 +1
- Stability: unverified → 0.03 ▲ functional
- 20 Oct 26 65
First indexed and scored.
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://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=proofofcustody.io | CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 22 Oct 2026 | 20 Jan 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 6963c49be9334df1f956cb0769c4feb7da9 |
| SANs: proofofcustody.io | ||||||
| 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 proofofcustody.io. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| io. | present | 38690 | 8 | Verified |
| proofofcustody.io. | 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 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000; includeSubDomains; preload |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | DENY |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://proofofcustody.io/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 →
assess_custody_independence ~116
Apply the Custody Independence Standard: a published four-pillar test of whether a custody arrangement has genuine independence or only nominal distribution. Pillars are vendor, entropy, control and operational independence. Use for 'how many hardware wallets do I need', 'is my multisig actually safe', or to compare custody architectures rather than brands. Architecture-neutral: self-managed, collaborative and institutional arrangements are assessed on identical criteria.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| platform | string | – | Platform slug or name to assess. Omit for the architecture archetypes. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
compare_custody_platforms ~85
Compare two or more custody platforms side by side on Proof of Custody's scores and custody architecture. Comparison is the shape most useful for a custody decision, because the differences that matter are structural rather than promotional.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| slugs | array | yes | Two or more platform slugs or names, e.g. ['onramp','unchained','casa']. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
find_source ~158
Source router. Given a topic or question about bitcoin or digital-asset market structure (ETF holdings or custodians, stablecoin supply or attestations, tokenized assets, x402 and agent payments, agentic commerce protocols, MCP registries, proof of reserves, regulators and licences, hardware wallet advisories, custody incidents), returns the primary or near-primary sources to read, with cadence, access terms and whether the URL answered today. Use before answering a factual question so the citation is the primary source.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | number | – | Max sources (default 5, max 12). |
| query | string | yes | Topic keyword or the question itself, e.g. 'who custodies IBIT', 'stablecoin supply', 'x402'. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
fit_custody_setup ~282
Which bitcoin custody models fit a described situation, by Proof of Custody's published rules, and which platforms run each fitting model by published score. Inputs are banded (amount, who must recover it, what they can do, holder type, jurisdiction, usage, the failure feared most, willingness to let institutions hold keys, budget, where it is now). Returns models with every rule that fired, the recovery steps each model demands, platforms with source links, and the procurement briefs to run. Structures, not advice: it never picks one provider. Use for 'my spouse cannot run a hardware wallet, what works', 'custody for an LLC', 'I have 100 BTC on one device and three heirs', or any question that starts from a person's situation.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| amount | string | – | How much bitcoin |
| budget | string | – | Custody budget per year |
| capability | string | – | What that person can do |
| current | string | – | Where it is now |
| fear | string | – | The failure that worries you most |
| holder | string | – | Who holds it |
| horizon | string | – | How you use it |
| institutions | string | – | Institutions holding keys |
| jurisdiction | string | – | Where you are |
| recoverer | string | – | Who must be able to recover it if you cannot |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_coldcard_incident_status ~120
Live status of the July 2026 Coldcard entropy failure: a firmware defect that caused affected hardware wallets to skip their hardware random number generator, making generated keys reconstructible offline. Returns the affected-model matrix with fixed firmware versions, confirmed and suspected loss figures, and open questions. Use for any question about Coldcard safety, whether a device or seed is affected, what to do about it, or whether self-custody is still safe after the incident. This is a developing story; the record is updated as primary sources move.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_custody_platform ~84
Full Proof of Custody record for one platform: overall score, per-category scores, custody model, fees, insurance position, strengths and limitations. Use after search_custody_platforms, or when a specific provider is named.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | string | yes | Platform slug or name, e.g. 'unchained', 'coinbase', 'onramp'. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_etf_custody_concentration ~73
Filing-derived analysis of custodian concentration across US spot bitcoin ETFs: which custodian holds each fund's bitcoin, and the resulting Nakamoto coefficient at the custody layer. Use for questions about bitcoin ETF safety, IBIT or FBTC custody, whether ETFs are diversified, or ETF versus direct ownership.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_hardware_wallet_scores ~135
Proof of Custody's hardware wallet rubric: six weighted dimensions — entropy and key generation 25%, firmware integrity 20%, supply chain 15%, disclosure conduct 15%, multisig and recovery portability 15%, privacy and data handling 10%. Entropy is weighted highest because a key generated from predictable randomness cannot be protected by anything downstream. Use for 'best hardware wallet', 'X vs Y device', or what to replace a device with. Returns per-device sourced rationale.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| device | string | – | Device slug, e.g. 'coldcard', 'ledger', 'trezor'. Omit for all. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_stablecoin_supply ~97
Daily snapshot of stablecoin supply: total USD-pegged circulating supply, USDT and USDC share, and the top 25 by supply, credited to DefiLlama with the as-of date. Use for 'how big is the stablecoin market', 'USDT vs USDC share', or a stablecoin's supply.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| symbol | string | – | Optional symbol to look up, e.g. USDC. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_tokenized_assets ~82
Daily snapshot of tokenized-asset (RWA) protocols by TVL, credited to DefiLlama, with a pointer to RWA.xyz for issued asset value by class (tokenized Treasuries, credit, commodities). Use for 'how big is tokenization', 'largest RWA protocols', or where to find tokenized Treasury fund sizes.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_x402_services ~84
Daily snapshot of the x402 agent-payments ecosystem: how many x402-payable services the Coinbase Bazaar lists, by network, asset and scheme, plus the x402 Foundation's 30-day transaction, volume, buyer and seller counts. Use for 'what is x402', 'how many services accept x402', or 'which networks do x402 services use'.
Input schema present but exposes no named parameters.
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
list_custody_incidents ~128
The Proof of Custody incident registry: dated records of major bitcoin custody failures from Mt. Gox to the 2026 Coldcard entropy defect, each with root cause, reported loss, the lesson, and which custody configurations the failure class could reach. Self-custody failures are included on equal terms with custodial ones. Use for questions about custody risk, historical hacks, or whether a given setup would have survived a class of event.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | string | – | Filter by failure type. |
| exposed_config | string | – | Only incidents that could reach this custody configuration. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
route_question ~112
Routing table lookup. Given a bitcoin custody or market-structure question, returns the matching route: the situation it belongs to, the custody models in play, the Proof of Custody page that answers it, which tool on this server to call next, and the primary sources for the facts with their refresh cadence. Use first when a question is broad or you are unsure which tool applies.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | number | – | Max routes (default 3). |
| question | string | yes | The question as the person asked it. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_custody_platforms ~165
Search Proof of Custody's independent scores for bitcoin and crypto custody platforms. Covers 90+ platforms across exchanges, qualified custodians, ETFs, IRAs, collaborative multisig and multi-institution custody, each scored 0-100 on a published six-category weighted methodology. Use to compare custody options, to read a named provider's published score and custody model, or to list top-scored platforms. Returns published data with the methodology attached, not a recommendation.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | string | – | Filter by category. |
| limit | number | – | Max results (default 10, max 40). |
| query | string | – | Name or keyword, e.g. 'unchained', 'IRA', 'multisig'. Omit to list top-scored. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_transcripts ~157
Full-text search across 320+ Onramp Media podcast transcripts (The Last Trade, Final Settlement and others) for what a guest or host said about a topic. Returns episode, show, date, matching passages and the episode URL. Use for 'what did X say about Y' and for sourcing a quote. Transcripts are machine-generated; verify a quote against the audio before publishing it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | number | – | Max episodes (default 5, max 8). |
| query | string | yes | Word or phrase to search for, e.g. 'multisig', 'Mt. Gox', 'custody insurance'. |
| show | string | – | Optional show name filter, e.g. 'The Last Trade'. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
watch_counterparties ~156
Watchtower for a holder's counterparties. Give it the names of the exchanges, custodians, ETFs, IRA providers or hardware wallets someone uses and it returns, for each, the published custody model and single point of failure, incidents in the registry, hardware rubric status where it is a device, and any correction or score change since a date. Use for 'anything I should know about where I hold bitcoin' and for scheduled checks. Nothing is logged about the names passed in.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| names | array | yes | Counterparty names or slugs, e.g. ['coinbase', 'kraken', 'coldcard']. |
| since | string | – | ISO date for the change window. Default: 90 days ago. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
whats_new ~98
What changed on Proof of Custody since a date: corrections, methodology changes, live incident updates and daily dataset refreshes (stablecoins, tokenized assets, x402, ETF net assets). Use for a scheduled briefing, or to check whether a cached answer went stale. Defaults to the last 30 days.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| since | string | – | ISO date, e.g. 2026-10-01. Default: 30 days ago. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server?
io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody is a hosted endpoint at https://proofofcustody.io/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 · proofofcustody.io
claude mcp add --transport http onrampbtc-proof-of-custody 'https://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp'
What is the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server?
io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody. Bitcoin custody scores, failure registry, ETF custody, stablecoin and x402 data, source router. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://proofofcustody.io/api/mcp).
Is the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server safe to use?
io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody scores 72 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 io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server expose?
io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody exposes 17 tools: search_custody_platforms, get_custody_platform, compare_custody_platforms, assess_custody_independence, list_custody_incidents, and 12 more. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 2,132 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody MCP server still maintained?
io.github.onrampbtc/proof-of-custody 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.