Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to BugSecure MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables authorized bug bounty automation via a scope-enforced MCP bridge, supporting web, secrets, mobile, and LLM red-team scanning, with reporting and advisory.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables automated bug bounty hunting and security research with tools for reconnaissance, web vulnerability scanning, API testing, binary analysis, and mobile app analysis through an MCP interface.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      An MCP server for authorized bug bounty work that enforces an evidence-driven workflow with session management, preflight checks, surface discovery, and verified scanning.
      12
      MIT
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables authorized pentest and bug bounty workflows from any MCP client, with scoped recon, per-host rate limits, and scanner output turned into deduplicated, triaged finding cards.
      9
      28 PyPI
      2
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Wraps multiple bug bounty platform APIs (HackerOne, Bugcrowd, etc.) behind a uniform MCP tool surface, enabling LLM agents to query programs, scope, and briefs across platforms through a single interface.
      -
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP server providing direct tool-access to security-testing primitives for bug bounty hunting, including recon, request replay, IDOR/BOLA fuzzing, vulnerability detection, secrets scanning, and persistent hunt memory with confidence-scored findings.
      38
      -

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 33 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, and descriptions explicitly cross-reference alternatives (e.g. get_report vs get_org_report, add_report_comment vs add_triage_comment). A few pairs like search/search_programs and the various get_program* tools could momentarily confuse, but the descriptions resolve them.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Nearly all names follow a snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_report, list_my_reports, submit_report, update_report_status). Minor deviations like bare 'search' and 'get_taxonomy' are readable but slightly inconsistent.

    Tool Count2/5

    33 tools is heavy for a single MCP server and falls into the 25+ range, which the rubric marks as too many. Although the bug bounty domain is broad with dual researcher/organisation roles, the surface could reasonably be split into smaller role-specific sets.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool surface covers the main researcher and organisation triage workflows well: report lifecycle, comments, grading, appeals, certificates, notifications, profiles, and programme search. Some lifecycle operations (programme management, terms acceptance, payments, disclosure approval) are intentionally delegated to the website, leaving only minor gaps.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues