Spec Driven Development
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
作者提供的说明(英文原文)
Free hosted CVE intel for bug-bounty agents: CVE fact-check, attack approaches from paid H1 reports
这三项永远不会合并成一个分数:意见、测量和人气是不同的东西。
我们还没有为它写通俗的介绍。下面是我们从注册中心读取到的事实。
选择你使用的 AI 应用,然后复制设置。
Authorization标为机密的值是你账户的钥匙。千万不要分享给别人,也不要粘贴到聊天里。
你需要
你用的是哪个应用?
在上方选择你的应用。我们会记住它,下次按钮会显示“安装到 …”。
这个地址需要在请求的 header 中放入密钥,而添加连接器的菜单无法设置。请改用 Claude Code、Cursor 或 VS Code。
在终端中运行这条命令
claude mcp add --transport http vulntel https://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp --header 'Authorization: your-value'运行前请先填写空着的值。
粘贴到项目中的 .cursor/mcp.json,或 ~/.cursor/mcp.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"vulntel": {
"url": "https://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp",
"headers": {
"Authorization": "your-value"
}
}
}
}浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。
粘贴到项目中的 .vscode/mcp.json
{
"servers": {
"vulntel": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://mcp.vulntel.com/mcp",
"headers": {
"Authorization": "your-value"
}
}
}
}浏览器会先询问是否打开应用,然后应用会显示设置并请你确认。密钥的值会留空,由你自己填写。
这个地址需要在请求的 header 中放入密钥,而添加连接器的菜单无法设置。请改用 Claude Code、Cursor 或 VS Code。
你的选择通过 Cookie 保存在这台设备上,无需账户。
Authorization 机密 HTTP header这些设置是根据作者在注册中心的条目生成的。如果 README 的写法不同,请以 README 为准。
工具名称和描述与服务器在 2026年11月6日 报告的完全一致。这些内容由作者撰写,不是我们写的;我们以纯文本形式显示。
enrich_cveFull 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: cv
check_technologyFind 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, mobileir
hunt_planTurn 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 r
observeScan 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. F
search_vulnsSearch 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 key
find_attack_approachesFind 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 r
find_continuationsWhen 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
assist_submissionSubmission & 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 (
program_outcome_priorAt 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 LIF
new_in_scopeFind 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
verify_cve_claimFact-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 / ref
corpus_statsCorpus size and data freshness (CVE / KEV / EPSS counts and latest timestamps).
search_public_codeSearch 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 unpa
我们检查的是任何人都能看到的信息;我们没有阅读代码。不适用的检查项不计入总数。 · 检查于 2026年11月7日
注册名称已通过域名 vulntel.com 验证(注册中心会核实域名所有权)
我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库
我们还没有从 GitHub 读取这个仓库
在 93 毫秒内响应(HTTP 200)
无需登录
已读取 13 个工具描述,未发现针对 AI 的隐藏指令
与注册中心里这个分类中所有活跃的服务器比较。只有当发布者拥有该仓库时,星标数才计入。
它在 3 项适用的基础检查中通过了 3 项。我们没有阅读代码。在添加密钥或令牌之前,请先看看这个服务器要求哪些权限,并使用只具备所需权限的密钥。
你需要填写:Authorization
它在作者的云端运行。通过互联网连接,无需安装,但你发送的内容会经过作者的服务器。
GitHub 仓库最后更新于–,最新版本(1.2.0)于4天前进入注册中心。
支持 MCP 的应用,例如 Claude Desktop、Claude Code、Cursor 和 VS Code。它通过 URL 连接,所以接受远程 MCP 服务器的应用也可以使用,例如开启开发者模式的 ChatGPT。
同一分类中有:Spec Driven Development, Remote Desktop Commander, SuperCollider
同一分类中其他作者的服务器,按星标数排序。
如何看卡片:★ GitHub 星标i三大支柱:评价 · 检查 · 使用情况i更新 = 最新版本发布到注册中心的时间i
MCP Server that facilitates spec-driven development workflows, not just Vibe Coding.
Remote Desktop Commander: use files, terminal and processes on your own computers from any AI app.
Make sound with SuperCollider: synths, drums, chords, melodies and soundscapes over OSC.
按原文从作者的仓库复制。PopNx MCP 没有审查或背书其内容。HTML、图片和脚本已被移除。链接会离开本站。
Most CVE tools hand your agent raw data. This one ranks it by what's actually being exploited, finds bugs by mechanism, catches the CVEs your agent invents — and transfers attack mechanics from ~14,000 disclosed bug-bounty reports.
A curated, hosted MCP corpus: ~422,000 CVEs, fused from NVD + CISA KEV + FIRST EPSS + OSV/GHSA + CISA Vulnrichment (SSVC), plus a mechanic layer distilled from ~14,000 disclosed, paid bug-bounty reports — refreshed daily. Not another live-API wrapper.
Free. Try it with no key (nine tools, 25 calls a day per IP address), then get a key: enter your email and your personal key is sent over. Tell me what you are hunting.
Most CVE MCP servers are thin wrappers: at query time they fan out to the same free public APIs and hand back whatever comes out. This is different in six concrete ways.
verify_cve_claim catches invented CVEs and wrong attributes. This is the one that matters most right now, with hallucinated AI bug reports flooding triage, and effectively no other CVE MCP does it.OpenSSH_8.9p1 Ubuntu-3ubuntu0.10, Apache/2.4.62 (Debian)) and each CVE carries the Debian / Ubuntu / Alpine tracker's verdict for that exact build next to the upstream one. Upstream-only tools call a patched distro host vulnerable.resolved: false with suggestions, never a silent 0 that reads as "not affected." A false zero is the worst answer a security tool can give.The hard part of AI-assisted security is not *finding* CVEs. It is triage, prioritization, and false positives. That is what this targets.
Everything below is real output from the live server, trimmed only for length.
The differentiator that matters most. Your agent cites CVE-2025-99999:
verify_cve_claim("CVE-2025-99999")
-> exists: false "No record in NVD / OSV / GHSA. Likely hallucinated or not-yet-published."
Or it gets the details wrong. Claim: *"CVE-2021-44228 is a medium-severity Apache Struts bug, and it is not exploited."*
verify_cve_claim("CVE-2021-44228", product="Apache Struts", severity="medium", exploited=false)
refuted "not exploited" -> in CISA KEV (added 2021-12-10) refuted "severity medium" -> actual CVSS 10.0, P1 refuted "affects Apache Struts" -> no product matching "Apache Struts"
The other feeds hand your agent data. This one tells you when the agent is wrong, before it reaches a report.
check_technology("GitLab") returns 792 CVEs for the product, de-duped and ranked so the exploited ones float to the top:
P1 KEV EPSS 99.8 CVE-2023-7028 account-takeover: password-reset email sent to an attacker address (CVSS 10)
P2 KEV EPSS 98.5 CVE-2021-39935 unauthenticated SSRF via the CI Lint API P3 EPSS 99.7 CVE-2023-2825 unauthenticated path traversal, arbitrary file read (CVSS 10) P3 EPSS 99.7 CVE-2022-2992 authenticated RCE via the GitHub import API (CVSS 9.9)
Names that map to more than one vendor are flagged ambiguous (here, gitlab vs a jenkins plugin) and kept separate, never silently merged. enrich_cve then gives you the full SSVC picture for any one of them:
enrich_cve("CVE-2024-3400") PAN-OS GlobalProtect
P1 KEV CVSS 10.0 EPSS 99.95 unauthenticated command injection -> root RCE SSVC exploitation=active automatable=yes technical_impact=total Metasploit exploit/linux/http/panos_telemetry_cmd_exec (rank: excellent) Public PoC 44 repos (h4x0r-dz 162 stars, W01fh4cker 90 stars, ...)
hunt_plan(["craftcms 4.4", "nginx", "keycloak"]) ranks your stack by its most-exploitable bug and names where each component historically bleeds:
#1 craftcms 4.4 97 CVEs, 12 high-risk
recurring_loci CWE-94 code injection x7 (2 exploited in the wild) -> probe template / eval surfaces first dig here P1 KEV EPSS 99.8 CVE-2025-32432 unauthenticated RCE (CVSS 10) your 4.4 is AFFECTED, fixed in 4.14.15 P1 KEV EPSS 99.9 CVE-2024-56145 RCE when register_argc_argv is on AFFECTED, fixed in 4.13.2
#2 nginx HTTP/2 Rapid Reset CVE-2023-44487 (KEV) #3 keycloak recurring_loci CWE-287 auth x12. OIDC request_uri SSRF CVE-2020-10770
It does not just list CVEs. It names the bug *class* a product family keeps failing at, ranked by real exploitation, and tells you whether *your version* is in range. Where to look, and what shape to expect.
search_vulns(cve_id="CVE-2021-44228"), "what else works like Log4Shell":
sim 0.88 CVE-2021-44832 Log4j2 JDBC Appender, JNDI LDAP RCE
sim 0.82 CVE-2022-40145 Apache Karaf, code injection via an attacker-controlled JNDI URL sim 0.79 CVE-2022-34916 Apache Flume, JNDI LDAP RCE via a JMS source
The same JNDI-injection mechanism, surfaced across *different products*. A keyword search for "log4j" never finds Karaf or Flume. Or search a concept directly, search_vulns("SAML SSO authentication bypass"):
P3 CVSS 9.1 CVE-2024-9487 GitHub Enterprise: SAML SSO bypass via signature verification
P3 CVSS 9.8 CVE-2025-25291 ruby-saml: auth bypass via a ReXML / Nokogiri parser differential P1 KEV CVSS 9.8 CVE-2025-59718 Fortinet FortiOS / FortiProxy: signature-verification bypass
search_vulns(days=7), run live today:
P1 KEV CVSS 10.0 CVE-2026-10520 Ivanti Sentry: unauthenticated OS command injection -> root RCE
P1 KEV CVSS 9.3 CVE-2026-50751 Check Point: IKEv1 auth bypass, remote-access VPN without a password P2 KEV CVSS 8.8 CVE-2026-11645 Chrome V8: out-of-bounds read/write -> sandbox escape RCE
Median time from disclosure to in-the-wild exploitation is now days, not months. The Ivanti bug above carried a CISA remediation deadline in the same week it landed. corpus_stats on 2026-11-03: ~422,800 CVEs, ~1,770 KEV entries, data under a day old. These figures are point-in-time and drift daily, so call corpus_stats yourself for the live count rather than trusting the numbers on this page.
Beyond CVEs, the corpus distills ~14,000 disclosed, paid HackerOne reports into product-agnostic *attack mechanics* — each bug's source → sink → trigger → preconditions, de-anchored from the product it was filed against. The premise: a vulnerability is a transferable mechanism, not a property of one product — so a move that paid on one stack is a checklist item on the next.
find_attack_approaches(query="ssrf reaching cloud metadata") — the human moves that transferred, novelty-ranked, each tagged with live program-actionability:
Reddit SSRF preview_url fetches an unfiltered URL → returns metadata program_active, pays
U.S. DoD SSRF /download-url?url= fetches AWS instance metadata program_active Concrete CMS SSRF DNS-rebind bypass → AWS IAM creds from the metadata svc program_active
find_continuations(position=...) — matches your *accumulated attacker position* mid-hunt to the next moves real reports played from a similar spot. Every move is status: UNVERIFIED with a decisive_check to run on the target — a legal move, never a confirmed bug.assist_submission(finding=...) — a grounded submission brief from the closest paid precedents (validity, what's novel, an escalation playbook), with every cited report validated against the corpus (citations_grounded) so it can't smuggle a fabricated precedent.program_outcome_prior("hackerone:gitlab") — the bug classes that historically *landed* on a program, with lift over base rate (GitLab: SSRF 3.4×, SQLi ~never).Honest about what this is: it primes and grounds a human hunter — it surfaces the move and the precedent. It does not find the bug for you; the target decides whether the move survives, and that's a step you still run.
The moat is three things a stateless model cannot self-generate, and this corpus holds all three:
observe recovers a host's real backend from its JS bundles and joins it to the corpus on the spot.The cardinal sin is treating it as a severity-number checker. The job is to transfer a proven mechanic onto your target and run it — or read a fix to *falsify* an option before you spend a probe on it.
Left alone, an agent answers from training data: stale, and it *invents* CVE ids under pressure. Paste this operating loop into your agent's rules (CLAUDE.md, Cursor/Windsurf, a system prompt):
You have the vulntel MCP. Your own CVE knowledge is a guess to be verified — prefer the corpus.
Operating loop, in order:
只显示了开头部分;其余内容请在仓库中阅读