mcp-tenant-isolation
Allows scanning Drizzle ORM queries and schemas for tenant isolation vulnerabilities.
Allows scanning Express.js applications for tenant isolation issues in routes and middleware.
Allows scanning Fastify applications for tenant isolation issues in routes and hooks.
Provides a GitHub Action and SARIF upload support for integrating tenant isolation scans into GitHub Code Scanning and CI/CD workflows.
Allows scanning Next.js applications (App Router and Pages Router) for cross-tenant data leakage risks.
Allows scanning Prisma schemas and database queries for tenant isolation vulnerabilities, ensuring multi-tenant data is properly scoped.
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@mcp-tenant-isolationScan my ./src directory for tenant isolation issues"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
mcp-tenant-isolation
Static analysis scanner for multi-tenant SaaS and MCP server code. 57 deterministic rules that catch cross-tenant data leakage before it reaches production.
What it does
If you build multi-tenant software, every query, every cache key, every file access, every API response needs to be scoped to the right tenant. Miss one, and Tenant A sees Tenant B's data. That's not a bug you want to find in production.
This scanner reads your source code and checks whether tenant isolation guards are present where they need to be. It covers 57 patterns across database queries, API routes, cache keys, file storage, schema design, logging, and MCP server architecture. It works with TypeScript, JavaScript, Prisma, Drizzle, raw SQL, Next.js, Express, and Fastify.
The scanner also runs as an MCP server, so you can plug it into Claude Desktop, Cursor, or any MCP-compatible agent and have your AI assistant scan code on demand.
Related MCP server: scanline
Who uses this
SaaS engineering teams who need to catch tenant isolation gaps before code ships
MCP server developers building tools that handle tenant-scoped data
Security teams who want tenant isolation checks in CI/CD
AI agent developers who want their agents to scan code for cross-tenant risks
Why this exists
General-purpose security scanners are not purpose-built for tenant isolation patterns. They catch SQL injection and XSS. They do not check whether your findMany query includes an organizationId filter. They do not check whether your MCP tool handler scopes tool visibility by tenant. They do not check whether your cache key includes a tenant prefix.
This scanner does exactly that. 57 rules, each checking for a specific tenant isolation pattern, each producing a finding with the rule ID, file, line, missing guard, and a remediation hint.
Every rule is deterministic. Given the same source code, the scanner produces the same findings. No machine learning, no probabilistic scoring. Static analysis has inherent limitations though. It cannot verify runtime behavior, database-level enforcement, or dynamic tenant isolation. The scan output includes a limitations field that lists what was and was not checked for each run.
Install
npm install -g mcp-tenant-isolation
# or use npx (no install needed)
npx mcp-tenant-isolation scan ./src
# or use Docker (no Node.js needed)
docker run --rm -v $(pwd):/code subodhkc/mcp-tenant-isolation scan /code/srcRequires Node.js 22 or later.
Quick start
mti scan ./src
mti scan ./src --format sarif --output results.sarif
mti scan ./src --format markdown --output TENANT-ISOLATION-REPORT.md
mti scan ./src --format ai --output findings.json
mti scan ./src --severity HIGH
mti rules # list all 57 rules
mti baseline # snapshot current findings for proof-of-fix tracking
mti init # create .mtirc.json with defaultsDemo
Rules
42 general multi-tenant rules
Prefix | Category | Count | Severity | What it checks |
TCM | Tenant Context Management | 6 | Critical | Tenant ID comes from session, not client input. Context propagation across async boundaries. |
DBQ | Database Query Isolation | 10 | Critical | Every query touching tenant-scoped data includes a tenant filter. Prisma, Drizzle, raw SQL. |
IDOR | IDOR Prevention | 5 | Critical | ID-based lookups verify tenant ownership before returning data. |
CSI | Cache and Session Isolation | 4 | High | Cache keys and session data are tenant-scoped. |
API | API Security | 3 | High | Tenant-aware rate limiting and response scoping. |
FSI | File Storage Isolation | 4 | High | S3, Blob, and filesystem access is tenant-scoped. |
LOG | Logging and Audit | 4 | Medium | Audit logs include tenant context. |
SCH | Schema and Migration | 6 | High | Prisma models and SQL migrations include tenant columns and indexes. |
15 MCP-specific rules
ID | Title | Severity | What it checks |
MCP-001 | Tool Visibility Scoping | Critical | Tool handler has no tenant-based allow/deny filter. |
MCP-002 | Cache Key Tenant Prefix | Critical | Tool results cached without tenant prefix. |
MCP-003 | Session Binding to User+Tenant | Critical | Session ID used as sole authorization. |
MCP-004 | Token Exchange (RFC 8693) | High | Original token forwarded instead of token exchange. |
MCP-005 | Per-Tenant Rate Limiting | Medium | No per-tenant rate limiting on tool calls. |
MCP-006 | Vector Store Tenant Namespace | High | Shared vector store without tenant namespaces. |
MCP-007 | Tool Description Injection | Medium | Tool description could bypass isolation. |
MCP-008 | Credential Vault Tenant Scoping | Critical | Credential vault stores tokens without tenant scoping. |
MCP-009 | Shared Service Account | High | Single shared API key for all tenant API calls. |
MCP-010 | Session Cleanup on Disconnect | Medium | No deterministic session cleanup. |
MCP-011 | Telemetry Tenant Identifier | Low | Telemetry strips tenant identifier. |
MCP-012 | Local Bind (127.0.0.1) | High | MCP server binds to 0.0.0.0 instead of 127.0.0.1. |
MCP-013 | Filesystem Tenant Root | High | Tool handler accesses filesystem without tenant root. |
MCP-014 | Cross-Tenant Artifact Leakage | High | Artifact storage without tenant prefix. |
MCP-015 | Dynamic Tool Namespace | Medium | Tools registered without tenant namespace. |
MCP rules are mapped to the OWASP MCP Top 10 (2025). See docs/OWASP-MAPPING.md for the full mapping. The mappings are advisory, for triage and reporting. This scanner does not certify OWASP compliance.
Architecture
The scanner pipeline runs in six stages:
Parsers — Babel AST for TypeScript/JavaScript, Prisma schema parser, SQL migration parser, MCP SDK import detection
IR and Flow Graph — Intermediate representation capturing sources, sinks, guards, routes, MCP tool definitions
Rule Engine — 57 deterministic rules evaluated against the IR. Each rule defines sources, sinks, and required guards
False Positive Filter — Test file detection, confidence scoring, pattern refinement
Reporters — Terminal, JSON, SARIF 2.1.0, AI-friendly JSON with remediation hints, Markdown
CLI and MCP Server —
mtiCLI with scan/init/rules/suppress/baseline/mcp commands. MCP server exposes 4 tools
Structured output
Scan results include structured metadata beyond just findings:
Completeness — COMPLETE, PARTIAL, or ERROR. If files fail to parse or rules fail to evaluate, completeness drops to PARTIAL and the reasons are listed.
Coverage — Files discovered, parsed, failed to parse. Rules available, selected, evaluated, failed, triggered. Unsupported file types counted.
Concern families — Findings grouped into 8 concern families (Tenant Context, Data Isolation, Cache and Session, MCP Security, Secrets and Credentials, Vector and Storage, API and Access, Audit and Logging) for triage.
Limitations — What the scan could and could not verify. Always includes static analysis limitation. Includes flow analysis scope and proof-of-fix status.
Scan receipt — Provenance metadata with engine version, rulepack digest, timestamp, and a SHA-256 receipt hash for tamper detection.
Proof-of-fix — Each finding is tagged as STILL_PRESENT, NEW, or NOT_VERIFIABLE relative to a baseline file. Run
mti baselineto establish a baseline.
Fingerprints
Findings use v2 semantic fingerprints that are stable under line movement and formatting changes. The fingerprint is derived from the rule ID, file path, normalized code snippet, and sorted missing guards. It does not include the line number. This means if you move code around without changing its semantics, the fingerprint stays the same and baseline tracking remains accurate.
MCP server
The package includes an MCP server for AI agent integration. It runs locally via stdio transport. No hosting, no network exposure.
{
"mcpServers": {
"tenant-isolation": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "mcp-tenant-isolation", "mcp"]
}
}
}Add this to your Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, or other MCP client config to let your AI agent scan code for tenant isolation issues on demand.
MCP tools
Tool | Description | Write? |
| Scan a project path. Returns structured findings with completeness, coverage, concern families, and receipt. | No |
| Returns all 57 rules with metadata. Filterable by category. | No |
| Returns rule details, OWASP mapping, CWE IDs, fix suggestions. | No |
| Add a suppression with reason, approver, controls, and expiry. | Yes (opt-in) |
The suppression tool is hidden by default. It only appears when the server is started with --allow-write-tools. This is a security boundary: read-only by default, write operations require explicit opt-in.
All filesystem operations during MCP scans are constrained to the project root configured at server startup. Traversal attacks (../), absolute paths outside root, UNC paths, and symlink escapes are rejected. See SECURITY.md for details.
CI/CD integration
Option 1: Pre-built GitHub Action (easiest)
Add this to .github/workflows/tenant-isolation.yml:
name: Tenant Isolation Scan
on: [push, pull_request]
jobs:
scan:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
contents: read
security-events: write
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: subodhkc/mcp-tenant-isolation@v2
with:
path: ./src
severity: HIGH
fail-on: HIGHRuns the scan, uploads SARIF to GitHub Code Scanning, generates a Markdown report artifact, and fails the workflow if HIGH or CRITICAL findings are detected.
Option 2: Manual npx
name: Tenant Isolation Scan
on: [push, pull_request]
jobs:
scan:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
contents: read
security-events: write
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-node@v4
with:
node-version: 22
- run: npx mcp-tenant-isolation scan ./src --format sarif --output results.sarif
- uses: github/codeql-action/upload-sarif@v3
with:
sarif_file: results.sarifExit codes
Code | Meaning |
0 | No findings |
1 | Findings found |
2 | Error (config invalid, parse failure, etc.) |
GitHub Code Scanning integration
When you upload SARIF output using github/codeql-action/upload-sarif@v3, findings appear in your repository's Security > Code scanning alerts tab. This works with both free and Advanced Security-enabled repos.
What happens:
mti scan --format sarif --output results.sarifgenerates a SARIF 2.1.0 fileupload-sarifaction sends it to GitHub's code scanning APIEach finding becomes a code scanning alert with file, line, severity, and remediation hint
Alerts can be dismissed, fixed, or tracked directly in the GitHub UI
Pull request annotations appear automatically on changed files
Requirements:
permissions: security-events: writein your workflowThe SARIF file must be generated before the upload step
Configuration
Create .mtirc.json in your project root:
{
"rules": {
"severity": {
"DBQ-001": "HIGH",
"MCP-001": "CRITICAL"
},
"exclude": ["DBQ-010"]
},
"paths": {
"include": ["src/**/*"],
"exclude": ["**/*.test.ts", "**/*.spec.ts"]
},
"suppressions": ".mti-suppressions.json",
"baseline": ".mti-baseline.json"
}Advanced configuration
{
"rules": {
"severity": { "DBQ-001": "HIGH" },
"exclude": ["DBQ-010"]
},
"paths": {
"include": ["src/**/*"],
"exclude": ["**/*.test.ts"]
},
"output": "terminal",
"framework": "nextjs-app-router",
"authHelpers": ["requireAuth", "getServerSession", "withAuth"],
"tenantGuards": ["organizationId", "tenantId", "workspaceId"],
"modelScopes": {
"userScoped": ["User", "UserSession"],
"global": ["Tenant", "AuditLog"]
},
"rulePacks": ["./custom-rules.json"],
"suppressions": ".mti-suppressions.json",
"baseline": ".mti-baseline.json"
}Field | Description |
| Default output format: |
| Framework hint: |
| Custom auth function names to detect (reduces false positives) |
| Custom tenant guard variable names beyond the defaults |
| Override model scope classification (userScoped, global, tenantScoped) |
| Paths to custom rule pack JSON files |
Custom rule packs
You can extend the scanner with custom rules via JSON rule packs. Custom rules are validated at load time:
Rule IDs must match
PREFIX-NNNformat (e.g.,CUST-001)Rule IDs cannot collide with built-in rules
Severity must be one of INFO, LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, CRITICAL
Maximum 50 custom rules across all rulepacks
Rulepack paths are constrained to the project root (MCP mode)
Invalid custom rules are rejected with warnings. The scan continues with built-in rules.
Suppressions
Suppressions require a concrete finding fingerprint, a rule ID, a documented approver identifier, a reason, compensating controls, and an expiry date. Rule-wide suppressions (no fingerprint) are only permitted as documented permanent exceptions.
The documentedApprover field records who approved the suppression. It does not represent independent human verification. It is a recorded attribution string, not a claim of external review.
Baselines
Run mti baseline to snapshot current findings. Future scans compare against the baseline and tag each finding as STILL_PRESENT, NEW, or NOT_VERIFIABLE (if no baseline exists). This gives you proof-of-fix tracking over time.
Report formats
Format | Flag | Use case |
Terminal |
| Developer console with pass/fail verdict |
JSON |
| Programmatic consumption, piping to other tools |
SARIF |
| GitHub Code Scanning, Azure DevOps |
AI JSON |
| AI agent consumption with remediation hints and context |
Markdown |
| Shareable report for PRs, team review, documentation |
# Generate a Markdown report for a PR
mti scan ./src --format markdown --output TENANT-ISOLATION-REPORT.md
# Upload SARIF to GitHub Code Scanning
mti scan ./src --format sarif --output results.sarifTrust and supply chain
npm Trusted Publishing — packages are published via GitHub Actions OIDC, not long-lived tokens. Each publish uses a short-lived, workflow-specific credential.
Provenance attestations — every published package includes a signed provenance statement in the Sigstore transparency log. You can verify that the package was built from the exact source in this repository.
0 npm audit vulnerabilities — dependencies are audited on every CI run. The lockfile is committed and CI uses
npm cifor reproducible installs.Deterministic rules — no machine learning, no probabilistic scoring. Given the same source code, the scanner produces the same findings every time.
Cross-platform CI — tested on Ubuntu, Windows, and macOS with Node 22 and 24. Node 26 canary runs as informational.
MIT licensed — free and open source. No telemetry, no phone-home, no data collection.
Limitations
Static analysis has inherent limits. Being upfront about them:
Intra-procedural flow analysis only. The scanner traces data flow within a single function body. It does not trace flow across function calls, files, or framework middleware boundaries. Most tenant isolation defects are missing-guard-at-sink problems that do not require inter-procedural analysis, but some edge cases may be missed.
No runtime verification. The scanner checks source code patterns. It cannot verify that database-level RLS policies are actually enabled, that middleware actually runs, or that tenant context is actually propagated at runtime.
TypeScript and JavaScript only. Python, Go, Ruby, and other languages are not supported yet.
False positives are possible. The scanner uses pattern-based detection with false-positive filtering (test file exclusion, auth signal detection, confidence scoring). Custom auth helpers and tenant guards can be configured via
.mtirc.jsonto reduce false positives.MCP stdio transport only. The MCP server runs locally via stdio. Remote/HTTP transport is not supported in v2.0.
See docs/FLOW-ANALYSIS-QUALIFICATION.md for detailed flow analysis scope.
Tech stack
AST Parsing: @babel/parser (TypeScript, JSX), Prisma schema parser, SQL migration parser
Rule Engine: RuleSpec declarative pattern with guard detection and evidence building
CLI: Commander
MCP: @modelcontextprotocol/server v2 (stdio transport, Zod schemas, structured output)
Output: Terminal, JSON, SARIF 2.1.0, AI JSON, Markdown
Testing: Vitest (203 tests, cross-platform CI on Ubuntu, Windows, macOS)
Roadmap
v2.0.0 (Current)
57 rules (42 general + 15 MCP-specific)
TypeScript and JavaScript support
Prisma schema analysis
SQL migration analysis (RLS, tenant columns, indexes)
CLI with terminal, JSON, SARIF, AI JSON, Markdown output
MCP server v2 SDK (stdio transport, Zod schemas, structured output)
Structured MCP output with completeness, coverage, and concern families
Scan Receipt with rulepack digest and tamper-detection hash
Evidence Envelope for verifiable scan artifacts
Stable v2 semantic fingerprints (line-movement resistant)
OWASP MCP Top 10 mapping (official 2025 categories)
Path boundary enforcement (traversal, symlink, UNC, Windows 8.3)
Write-tool gating (read-only by default, suppression opt-in)
Suppression policy with expiration and documented approver
Baseline tracking with proof-of-fix states
Severity override in .mtirc.json
Custom rule packs with validation
Configurable auth helpers and tenant guards
Model scope classification with config overrides
Framework detection (Next.js, Express, Fastify)
Cross-platform CI matrix (Node 22/24, Ubuntu/Windows/macOS)
Future
Python support (FastAPI, Django, Flask)
SQLAlchemy ORM analysis
Watch mode (mti scan --watch)
VS Code extension
Runtime two-tenant adversarial test harness
Go and Ruby language support
Incremental scanning with AST cache
Links
License
MIT. Free and open source.
This server cannot be installed
Maintenance
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server that provides code validation rules and analysis for various stacks/frameworks, enabling automated code reviews and reporting directly from VS Code and other editors.
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceSecurity scanning MCP server. Semgrep integration, SARIF parsing, baseline diffing, framework-aware ruleset selection, and automated finding triage.131MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceSecurity scanning for MCP servers from the inside out. Provides runtime inspection, AST-based static analysis, config audit, dependency analysis, and OWASP MCP Top 10 compliance in a single MCP server.55625MIT
- AlicenseCqualityBmaintenanceSecurity scanner and MCP server that catches dangerous patterns in MCP servers and AI agent projects, such as leaked secrets, shell execution, and prompt-injection text. Runs as both a CLI and MCP server with CI-friendly severity gates.21MIT
Related MCP Connectors
Security scanner for MCP servers. Detect vulnerabilities, prompt injection, and tool poisoning.
Scan any public GitHub MCP-server repo for security issues. 37 MCP-specific L1 rules, 8 languages.
MCP server for static security analysis of Android source code
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/subodhkc/mcp-tenant-isolation'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server