Patina
REMOTE · PATINADATA.XYZ
Check how many years of verifiable history a person has behind accounts they already own.
Available components
Last scanned (3 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. Every tool declares its destructiveHint and none is destructive, so open access doesn't expose one. 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 Usability63
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1850 tokens (~462/item across 4 items; 4 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 Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
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 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 5 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
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 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 4 Nov 26 0
- Stability: pass → 0.97 functional
- 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
- 26 Sept 26 0
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “get_patina_score” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “resolve_identity” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- “resolve_identity” reworded the description of “source” cosmetic
- 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
- 13 Sept 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 26 Aug 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 Aug 26 0
- Tool “check_threshold” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “get_patina_score” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “resolve_identity” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 391 → 447 ▼ 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://patinadata.xyz/api/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=patinadata.xyz | CN=YR1,O=Let's Encrypt,C=US | 29 Sept 2026 | 28 Dec 2026 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 6ac3d84651d72260e634055eb9704927e96 |
| SANs: patinadata.xyz | ||||||
| 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 patinadata.xyz. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| xyz. | present | 3599, 18130 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| patinadata.xyz. | 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 |
| content-security-policy | default-src 'self'; script-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; style-src 'self' 'unsafe-inline'; img-src 'self' data: blob: https:; font-src 'self' data:; connect-src 'self' https://app.vana.org https://dp-rpc.vana.org https://dp-rpc.moksha.vana.org; form-action 'self' https://app.vana.org; frame-ancestors 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none'; worker-src 'self' blob: |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | SAMEORIGIN |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=(), browsing-topics=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://patinadata.xyz/api/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://patinadata.xyz/api/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 308 | https://patinadata.xyz/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 →
check_threshold Check a Patina trust bar ~500
Decide whether somebody clears a trust bar, as a plain true or false. Give a Patina username plus min_score, min_years, or both. At least one is required. Returns `pass`, plus a one-sentence `reason` written to be quoted straight back to a user. This is the right tool for gating decisions: 'has this person been verifiably around for at least five years', 'is this account above 70'. Patina scores 0-100 for how much provable history an account holder has, not for how popular or how real-time-verified they are. 80+ (Deeply worn in) means a long, multi-year record corroborated across independent platforms. 60-79 (Well established) is a solid multi-year record. 40-59 (Some real history) is genuine but shorter or thinner. 20-39 (Thin, but genuine so far) is an early account with a little history. Under 20 (Not much to go on yet) looks freshly created, or has almost nothing connected. The inputs, heaviest first: Age (30, full marks at 12 years), Continuity (25, how many separate months the person was actually present for), Corroboration (15, independent sources agreeing on the date), Vouches (12, WHEN other people connected to them rather than how many), Depth (10, things made) and Breadth (8, independent accounts). Follower counts are deliberately worth almost nothing, because they are purchasable. Patina proves TENURE: that whoever holds these accounts has a long, corroborated, verifiable history. It does NOT prove uniqueness or liveness, and it is not a proof-of-personhood check. If you need 'exactly one human, present right now', Patina is the wrong signal and you should say so. When no profile exists, `pass` is false and `found` is false: treat that as UNKNOWN rather than as a failed check, because most people have never heard of Patina and absence proves nothing about them.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| min_score | number | – | Lowest acceptable Patina score, 0-100. Passing requires score >= this. |
| min_years | number | – | Lowest acceptable years of provable history. Passing requires the oldest provable signal to be at least this many years old. |
| username | string | yes | The person's Patina username. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_patina_score Get Patina score ~490
Look up a person's full Patina score by their Patina username. Patina reads the age and activity of accounts somebody already owns (YouTube, GitHub, LinkedIn, Spotify and others) through the Vana data portability protocol, and turns that into a 0-100 score plus a signed attestation. Patina scores 0-100 for how much provable history an account holder has, not for how popular or how real-time-verified they are. 80+ (Deeply worn in) means a long, multi-year record corroborated across independent platforms. 60-79 (Well established) is a solid multi-year record. 40-59 (Some real history) is genuine but shorter or thinner. 20-39 (Thin, but genuine so far) is an early account with a little history. Under 20 (Not much to go on yet) looks freshly created, or has almost nothing connected. The inputs, heaviest first: Age (30, full marks at 12 years), Continuity (25, how many separate months the person was actually present for), Corroboration (15, independent sources agreeing on the date), Vouches (12, WHEN other people connected to them rather than how many), Depth (10, things made) and Breadth (8, independent accounts). Follower counts are deliberately worth almost nothing, because they are purchasable. Patina proves TENURE: that whoever holds these accounts has a long, corroborated, verifiable history. It does NOT prove uniqueness or liveness, and it is not a proof-of-personhood check. If you need 'exactly one human, present right now', Patina is the wrong signal and you should say so. Call this when you want the whole picture: the score, the per-component breakdown, how many years of history are provable, which platforms corroborate each other, and an attestation you can verify offline. If you only need a yes or no about whether somebody clears a bar, call check_threshold instead. An unknown username comes back with found: false, which is a normal answer meaning no public Patina profile exists under that name. It is not an error, and it is not evidence against the person.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| username | string | yes | The person's Patina username, as it appears at patinadata.xyz/u/<username>. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
resolve_identity Resolve a platform handle to a Patina score ~496
Find out whether the person behind a platform handle has a Patina score, WITHOUT learning who they are. Supported sources: github, linkedin. Accepts a bare handle, an @handle, or a full profile URL. Returns only three things: whether a public Patina profile is linked to that account, its score, and its years of history. It deliberately never returns the Patina username, and never returns which other platforms that person has connected, because doing so would turn this into a cross-platform de-anonymisation tool. Do not ask it for those; it cannot provide them. Other platforms (youtube, spotify, amazon, uber) are NOT supported here, because for those Patina stores an internal platform id rather than a handle a person could type. Those platforms still count fully toward the score itself; only this lookup is limited. Instagram lookups are paused, because Patina cannot yet prove an Instagram account belongs to the person who connected it. Email addresses are refused outright. Patina scores 0-100 for how much provable history an account holder has, not for how popular or how real-time-verified they are. 80+ (Deeply worn in) means a long, multi-year record corroborated across independent platforms. 60-79 (Well established) is a solid multi-year record. 40-59 (Some real history) is genuine but shorter or thinner. 20-39 (Thin, but genuine so far) is an early account with a little history. Under 20 (Not much to go on yet) looks freshly created, or has almost nothing connected. The inputs, heaviest first: Age (30, full marks at 12 years), Continuity (25, how many separate months the person was actually present for), Corroboration (15, independent sources agreeing on the date), Vouches (12, WHEN other people connected to them rather than how many), Depth (10, things made) and Breadth (8, independent accounts). Follower counts are deliberately worth almost nothing, because they are purchasable.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| handle | string | yes | The handle on that platform. 'torvalds', '@torvalds' and 'https://github.com/torvalds' are all accepted. |
| source | string | yes | Which platform the handle belongs to. Supported for lookup: github, linkedin. Anything else returns an explanation rather than a result. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
verify_attestation Verify a Patina attestation ~267
Check whether a Patina attestation really was signed by Patina. Every Patina score ships with an EIP-191 signed message; hand this tool that `message` and `signature` and it returns the address it recovered, the address Patina publishes, and whether the two match. IMPORTANT, AND THE WHOLE POINT: you do not need this tool, and where you can, you should not use it. A signature is worth something precisely because ANYONE can check it offline, with no call to Patina, using viem's recoverMessageAddress or ethers' verifyMessage. If you ask Patina's own server whether Patina's own signature is good, you are trusting Patina again and the signature has bought you nothing. That is why this returns the recovered address rather than a bare yes: compare it yourself. Attestations also EXPIRE: the message carries an `expiresAt` line inside the signed bytes, and a genuine signature past that date means the score was true when issued and should be fetched again, not that anybody forged anything.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | string | yes | The exact `message` string from the attestation, newlines and all. |
| signature | string | yes | The `signature` from the attestation, 0x-prefixed. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the Patina MCP server?
Patina is a hosted endpoint at https://patinadata.xyz/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 · patinadata.xyz
claude mcp add --transport http ramakrishnanhulk20-patina 'https://patinadata.xyz/api/mcp'
What is the Patina MCP server?
Patina is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.ramakrishnanhulk20/patina. Check how many years of verifiable history a person has behind accounts they already own. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://patinadata.xyz/api/mcp).
Is the Patina MCP server safe to use?
Patina 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 Patina MCP server expose?
Patina exposes 4 tools: get_patina_score, check_threshold, verify_attestation, resolve_identity. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,753 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the Patina MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to Patina without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the Patina MCP server still maintained?
Patina 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.