opsecforge-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to opsecforge-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceLocal MCP server for AI agents and vibe coding safety: deterministic risk checks (payments, auth, database, secrets, infrastructure), sessions, checkpoints, policy inspection, and fix prompts. Runs over stdio against a local git repository; no language model judges risk.8Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceRead-only MCP server that exposes the scan_text and scan_paths tools so AI coding agents can scan text, files, staged Git changes, local history and archives for secrets entirely offline, returning redacted findings with rules, positions and fingerprints and flagging incomplete scans. Results can be emitted as JSON, JSONL or SARIF without ever serializing raw secret values or source snippets.Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables local LLM tools and agentic IDEs to inspect repository token maps, retrieve clean token-bounded codebase snapshots, and audit code for hardcoded secrets via MCP over stdio.10 npm4MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceLocal stdio MCP server for working on Intern-hosted sites through guarded Git checkouts. It enables authentication, site preparation, testing, validation, and publishing via coding harnesses like Codex and Claude Code.4 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceLocal MCP server that scans code for security issues (secrets, dependencies, configurations, risky patterns) and integrates with GitHub Copilot in VS Code for automated pre-commit reviews.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceLocal CLI and MCP server that redacts secrets from logs, files, and diffs before sending them to AI agents, with stable placeholders and token-budgeted truncation.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
Each tool has a distinct action+target (redact text vs. file, verify webhook, inspect JWT, checksum, scan secrets). The only mild overlap is redact_file vs. scan_secrets, both reading local files for secrets, but descriptions clearly separate returning redacted content from reporting findings, so an agent can choose correctly.
Five tools follow a clean verb_noun pattern (redact_text, verify_webhook, inspect_jwt, redact_file, scan_secrets), with only file_checksum deviating into a noun_noun form. Minor inconsistency but overall predictable and readable.
Six focused tools is well-scoped for a security/opsec server, with each tool earning its place across redaction, verification, integrity, and scanning. No bloat or thinness.
The set covers the core opsec lifecycle: scanning, redacting (text and file), verifying webhooks/JWTs, and checksums. Minor gaps remain (e.g., no secret-detection over arbitrary in-context text without redaction, or config-driven allowlist management), but core workflows are complete.