Skip to main content
Glama
Breach Radar

Breach Radar

Official
by MAASAI-Labs

Related Servers

Alternatives to Breach Radar

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-compatible AI clients to run passive OSINT investigation tools for domains, IPs, emails, usernames, breaches, DNS, WHOIS, and reputation checks through natural-language tool calls. It exposes 16 passive tools by default, plus graph and batch helpers, with additional active tools available when explicitly enabled.
      20
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Enables any MCP client to look up CVE intelligence — severity summaries, filtered searches, and full per-CVE detail fusing NVD, MITRE-CNA pre-NVD, CISA KEV, EPSS, and GitHub GHSA data — alongside a Shodan-derived internet-exposure footprint showing how many internet-facing services run a version mapping to a given CVE. It is free, keyless, and read-only, and distinguishes verified zeros from unassessed or failed lookups.
      16
      1,345 npm
      20
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to look up domains, URLs, IPs/ASNs, email addresses, phone numbers, crypto wallets, and business records; run autonomous investigations; collect crawl artifacts; and perform evidence-backed scam checks with traceable provenance.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Seven read-only tools help AI agents review public breach disclosures, organization histories, incident timelines and aggregate statistics. Preserve source attribution, redaction and incomplete-coverage warnings. Local threat-text triage needs no key; no breached data, credentials or private records are collected.
      2
      7
      MIT

    TDQS

    A3.7/5.0

    Scored across 10 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct targets: breach_catalog (search HIBP by keyword), breach_details (one breach by name), domain_breaches, email_breaches, and password_pwned each address a different query type. Mild overlap exists between the aggregate attack_surface_report and its component tools (security_headers, ct_subdomains, domain_breaches), and cve_search's KEV filter partially overlaps kev_lookup, but descriptions clarify the boundaries.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All names use lowercase snake_case with a consistent noun-centric pattern (breach_catalog, domain_breaches, cve_search), so the set reads predictably. Minor deviations like the abbreviated ct_subdomains and adjective form password_pwned slightly break the otherwise uniform convention, but nothing is confusing.

    Tool Count5/5

    Ten tools is well-scoped for a passive security/breach reconnaissance server, with each tool covering a meaningful slice (breach lookup, vulnerability lookup, surface exposure). No redundant or trivial tools inflate the count.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the core domain well: breach lookup across catalogue/domain/email/password, vulnerability search via NVD and KEV, and surface exposure via headers, TLS/CT, and DNS records in the aggregate report. Minor gaps remain, such as no standalone DNS/email-auth tool (only bundled in attack_surface_report) and no IP-reputation or non-CT subdomain enumeration, but these are workable for a passive-only design.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessSyncing