USVI Public Records
Search and read U.S. Virgin Islands public records: laws, court records, audits, hearings, reports.
作者による説明(英語の原文)
Explainable OFAC sanctions name screening against the SDN list. Runs locally, no API key.
この3つを1つのスコアにまとめることはしません。意見、測定、人気はそれぞれ別のものだからです。
このサーバーのやさしい解説はまだ書いていません。以下はレジストリから読み取った事実です。
使っているAIアプリを選んで、設定をコピーしてください。
OFACMATCH_DATA_DIR, OFACMATCH_REFRESH_HOURSどのアプリを使っていますか?
上でアプリを選んでください。選んだアプリを覚えておくので、次からはボタンに「…にインストール」と表示されます。
Claude Desktop → Settings → Developer → Edit Config を開き、claude_desktop_config.json にこれを貼り付けます
{
"mcpServers": {
"ofac-match": {
"command": "dnx",
"args": [
"OfacMatch.Mcp",
"--yes"
],
"env": {
"OFACMATCH_DATA_DIR": "your-value",
"OFACMATCH_REFRESH_HOURS": "your-value"
}
}
}
}ターミナルでこれを実行します
claude mcp add ofac-match --env OFACMATCH_DATA_DIR=your-value --env OFACMATCH_REFRESH_HOURS=your-value -- dnx OfacMatch.Mcp --yes動かす前に、空欄の値を入力してください。
プロジェクトの .cursor/mcp.json、または ~/.cursor/mcp.json に貼り付けます
{
"mcpServers": {
"ofac-match": {
"command": "dnx",
"args": [
"OfacMatch.Mcp",
"--yes"
],
"env": {
"OFACMATCH_DATA_DIR": "your-value",
"OFACMATCH_REFRESH_HOURS": "your-value"
}
}
}
}ブラウザがアプリを開いてよいか確認し、そのあとアプリが設定を表示して確認を求めます。キーの値は空欄のままなので、自分で入力してください。
プロジェクトの .vscode/mcp.json に貼り付けます
{
"servers": {
"ofac-match": {
"type": "stdio",
"command": "dnx",
"args": [
"OfacMatch.Mcp",
"--yes"
],
"env": {
"OFACMATCH_DATA_DIR": "your-value",
"OFACMATCH_REFRESH_HOURS": "your-value"
}
}
}
}ブラウザがアプリを開いてよいか確認し、そのあとアプリが設定を表示して確認を求めます。キーの値は空欄のままなので、自分で入力してください。
これはパソコンで動くサーバーですが、ChatGPTがつなげるのはインターネット上のサーバーだけです。ほかのアプリを選んでください。
選んだアプリは、この端末のCookieに保存されます。アカウントは不要です。
この設定は、作者のレジストリ登録情報から作成しています。READMEと違う場合は、READMEに従ってください。
パソコンで動くサーバーです。インストールすると、ツール一覧がAIアプリに表示されます。
誰でも見られる情報をチェックしており、コードは読んでいません。当てはまらない項目は数に入れていません。 · 2026年11月8日にチェック
レジストリ名は、リポジトリを所有するGitHubアカウント krunalsolanki で確認済みです
このリポジトリはまだGitHubから読み取っていません
このリポジトリはまだGitHubから読み取っていません
これはパソコンで動くため、インターネット上のエンドポイントはありません
パソコンで動き、代わりにローカルの設定を使います
パソコンで動くサーバーです。ツール一覧を読み取れるのは、インターネット上のエンドポイントがある場合だけです
レジストリでこのカテゴリにある有効なすべてのサーバーと比較しています。スターは、公開者がリポジトリの所有者である場合だけ数えます。
当てはまる基本チェック1項目のうち1項目に合格しました。コードは読んでいません。キーやトークンを追加する前に、サーバーがどんなアクセスを求めているかを確認し、必要な権限だけを持つキーを使ってください。
レジストリには必須のキーは載っていません。ただし、最初に使うときにサインインを求めるサーバーもあります。
あなたのパソコンで動きます。必要なときにAIアプリが起動し、データは作者のサーバーを通りません(サーバー自体がオンラインサービスを呼び出す場合を除きます)。
GitHubリポジトリの最終更新は–、最新バージョン(2.0.0)がレジストリに届いたのは3 日前です。
Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor、VS CodeなどのMCP対応アプリで使えます。パソコンに.NETも必要です。
同じカテゴリには:USVI Public Records, Spectrum Data Digital, Lintsure
同じカテゴリで、ほかの作者が作ったサーバー。スターの多い順。
カードの見方:↓ 週あたりのダウンロードi★ GitHubスターi3つの柱:レビュー · チェック · 利用状況i更新=最新バージョンをレジストリに公開した日i
Search and read U.S. Virgin Islands public records: laws, court records, audits, hearings, reports.
Sanctions screening, SAM.gov contract leads and new UK company checks for AI agents and Claude.
Compliance readiness checks for code: EU AI Act, GDPR, SOC 2, ISO 27001. Local. Not legal advice.
作者のリポジトリから書かれたとおりにコピーしたものです。PopNx MCPは内容を確認・推奨していません。HTML、画像、スクリプトは取り除いています。リンクはこのサイトの外へ移動します。
OFAC sanctions name screening for .NET that tells you *why* a name matched.
[Try it in your browser](https://krunalsolanki.github.io/ofac-match/): no install, and the names you type never leave your browser.
I spent ten years building title and mortgage systems at First American, including OFAC screening that stops a loan from going to someone on the Treasury's sanctions list. Name matching sounds simple until a compliance analyst asks why a name was flagged, or why a misspelled one wasn't.
Many teams still search OFAC's website by hand or rely on screening logic they can't see inside. I wanted something small and open: load the official list, score names the way OFAC describes in its own FAQ, and show the reasoning behind every score.
OfacMatch downloads the Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list from OFAC, screens names against it, and gives each potential match a score from 0 to 100, the same scale OFAC's search tool uses. Every match comes with an explanation: which name or alias it hit, and how each part of the name paired up.
It handles the messy parts of real names: accents, LAST, First ordering, apostrophes and hyphens, titles like "Dr.", company endings like LLC or LTD (even misspelled), and aliases. If you pass a year of birth or country that disagrees with the listed record, the match is flagged rather than hidden, because that call belongs to a person.
It has no dependencies, runs inside your own process (names never leave your systems), and works on modern .NET as well as .NET Framework 4.7.2+.
I measured it on the real list rather than guessing, on names it was never tuned on: at a threshold of 85 it finds all 4,235 realistic variations of listed names in a held-out test, and 99.6% of 2,160 harder ones such as a wrong first letter, a nickname or an extra middle name. It is also compared with eight standard name-matching methods. The results below have the details, including where a simpler method does better.
Version 2.0 changes how a searched name with extra parts is scored; see the changelog. Feedback, bug reports and name variations that score badly are very welcome.
OfacMatch helps you screen; it doesn't make compliance decisions and isn't legal advice. A score says how alike two names are written, not whether two records are the same person. Pick your threshold from your own risk assessment and have someone review every potential match. More in Using OfacMatch responsibly.
dotnet add package OfacMatch
using OfacMatch.Data;
using OfacMatch.Screening;
using var http = new HttpClient(); var list = await SanctionsList.DownloadAsync(http, saveToDirectory: "ofac-data");
var screener = new SanctionsScreener(list, new ScreeningOptions { MinScore = 85 });
foreach (var match in screener.Screen("Aymen Zawahri")) { Console.WriteLine(match.Explain()); }
Output against the SDN list published 27 October 2026:
Score 95.8 via NameParts against Primary name "AL ZAWAHIRI, Dr. Ayman"
Entry 2676: AL ZAWAHIRI, Dr. Ayman (Individual; programs: SDGT) Full-name score 84.5; name-parts score 95.8 AYMEN -> AYMAN: similarity 0.907, sounds alike ZAWAHRI -> ZAWAHIRI: similarity 0.946, sounds alike
How scoring works walks through this example step by step.
var request = new ScreeningRequest("John Michael Doe")
{ Type = EntryType.Individual, // a borrower is a person, so skip companies and vessels YearOfBirth = 1971, // flags matches whose listed dates of birth disagree Country = "United States", // flags matches whose listed addresses are all elsewhere };
var matches = screener.Screen(request);
var list = SanctionsList.LoadFromDirectory("ofac-data"); // SDN.CSV, ALT.CSV, ADD.CSV
OFAC updates the list often. Reload it at least daily, and screen against the current list before every decision.
OfacMatch.Mcp lets Claude, GitHub Copilot and other MCP clients screen names, look up SDN entries and explain scores. It runs locally and needs no API key.
Claude Desktop: download the extension for your computer from the latest release (ofac-match-windows.mcpb or ofac-match-mac-*.mcpb) and double-click it. No .NET or config file needed.
Claude Code plugin (adds the server plus a skill for reporting results responsibly; needs the .NET 10 SDK):
/plugin install ofac-match --marketplace krunalsolanki/ofac-match
Claude Code and other clients (needs the .NET 10 SDK):
claude mcp add ofac-match -- dnx OfacMatch.Mcp --yes
Tools: screen_name, screen_names, get_sanctions_entry, compare_names, get_list_info. See the MCP server guide for other clients and settings.
dotnet run --project samples/OfacMatch.Cli -- "Aymen Zawahri" --min 85 --yob 1951
OfacMatch was improved on a development set of names, then frozen and tested once on a separate held-out set: 600 other listed parties (400 individuals, 200 companies) and 3,000 ordinary names from a vocabulary never used during development, against the SDN list published 27 October 2026. The evaluation protocol explains the rules.
| Threshold | Variations found (4,235) | Harder variations found (2,160) | Two-part ordinary names that alert | Three-part ordinary names that alert |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 80 | 100.0% | 99.9% | 75.7% | 51.0% |
| 85 | 100.0% | 99.6% | 37.5% | 10.3% |
| 90 | 100.0% | 98.4% | 10.2% | 2.2% |
| 95 | 99.6% | 83.4% | 2.1% | 0.0% |
Compared with other methods. The same cases were screened with eight standard methods, including Levenshtein, Jaro-Winkler, RapidFuzz-style token ratios and trigram TF-IDF (full comparison). To compare them fairly, each method gets the threshold at which the same share of ordinary names alerts. The strongest simple method, a token set ratio, found slightly more of the harder variations than OfacMatch (98.9% against 96.7% when 5% of ordinary names alert). OfacMatch raised clearly fewer alerts on names that share a first name with a listed person, such as "Ayman Smith" (11.9% against 16.4%), and it explains every score. For a review team, fewer alerts and a reason for each one is usually worth more than the last two points of recall, but that trade-off is yours to make.
Three things stand out in these numbers. Screening on a name alone alerts a lot: at 85, more than a third of ordinary two-part names look like *something* on the list. Date of birth and country are what let a reviewer clear those quickly. Moving the threshold from 85 to 90 cut those alerts by about three quarters while still finding every variation and 98.4% of the harder ones, so the threshold deserves a deliberate choice rather than a default. And since 2.0, a listed two-part name inside a longer searched name scores high, so three-part names alert more often at 85 than in 0.1.2 (10.3% against 3.3%).
You can re-run it yourself on the development set:
dotnet run -c Release --project eval/OfacMatch.Evaluation -- --data ofac-data --out docs/evaluation.md
dotnet run -c Release --project eval/OfacMatch.Evaluation -- --data ofac-data --baselines --out docs/baselines.md
| Guide | What it covers |
|---|---|
| Why OfacMatch | Benefits and comparison with other options |
| How scoring works | Every step, with a worked example |
| API and configuration reference | Types, options and defaults |
| Using OfacMatch responsibly | Thresholds, review, record keeping, limits |
| Evaluation protocol | How the development and held-out sets are kept apart, and how settings were chosen |
| Held-out results and comparison | Results on names never used during development, and against eight standard methods |
| Development results, comparison and tuning | The set used while improving the method |
| MCP server | Using OfacMatch from AI assistants |
Things I'd like to work on, roughly in order:
dotnet tool packageIf you'd like to help with any of these, or have a case that scores badly, open an issue. CONTRIBUTING.md has the details.
If you use OfacMatch in research or a write-up, please cite the paper:
Solanki, K. (2026). *Explainable Name Screening Against the OFAC SDN List: An Open Implementation and Reproducible Evaluation* (preprint). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23930926
@misc{solanki2026ofacmatch,
author = {Solanki, Krunal}, title = {Explainable Name Screening Against the {OFAC} {SDN} List: An Open Implementation and Reproducible Evaluation}, year = {2
冒頭だけを表示しています。続きはリポジトリで読めます