What can you do with this server?

The Kali Linux MCP Server enables remote command execution and management within a Kali Linux penetration testing environment: * Execute Commands: Run non-interactive commands (like ping 127.0.0.1) for security testing or general Linux tasks * Manage Interactive Sessions: Start, control, and terminate interactive commands (such as mysql -u root -p) with session IDs * Send Input & Retrieve Output: Provide input to and collect output from active command sessions * Access Security Tools: Leverage the full suite of built-in Kali Linux penetration testing tools remotely * Docker-Based Deployment: Runs in a Docker container with SOCKS5 proxy support and SSH key configuration

Which integrations are available for this server?

Enables execution of Burp Suite commands for web application security testing, though with limitations on interactive features and UI-based interactions. Provides access to Kali Linux penetration testing tools and commands via an SSH connection, allowing execution of security testing operations in a containerized environment. Allows running Metasploit penetration testing commands in non-interactive mode, supporting security testing and exploitation workflows without entering interactive command mode.

How do I use Kali Linux MCP Server?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Kali Linux MCP Server scan for open ports on 192.168.1.1" 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.

Kali Linux MCP Server

by sfz009900

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Score Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

目前只是个玩具,只支持执行可以返回的命令,如burp suite和metasploit等不能进行界面和命令交互,metasploit倒是可以叫ai agent直接执行不进入命令交互模式,有时间弄得的哥们可以拿去加强一下 😜

kalilinuxmcp

kali linux mcp,pentest,penetration test

更新:

20250401更新: 新增简单的交互式处理

如何安装:

1: 首先要用ssh-keygen -t rsa做一个私钥和公钥,替换公钥到Dockerfile的,替换私钥到"C:\Users[Username].ssh\kali000",这里自行去src\index.ts里搜索"kali000"替换路径

'ssh-rsa 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 hack004@DESKTOP-H4HRI73'

2:因为是国内环境,docker里我加了使用主机的socks5代理,自行搜索来替换"192.168.31.110",还有dns服务器也强制用dns2socks转到了本地127.0.0.1使用socks5代理,可自行去Dockerfile里替换或者去掉

3:原始使用的"booyaabes/kali-linux-full"镜像,但是里面软件版本有点老,自行选择是否要执行以下操作更新(主要需要更新很久!)

1:wget -q -O - https://archive.kali.org/archive-key.asc | gpg --import 
2:curl -fsSL https://archive.kali.org/archive-key.asc | sudo gpg --dearmor -o /usr/share/keyrings/kali-archive-keyring.gpg 
3:sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade -y 
4:(下载更新最新版kali linux的所有工具,注意很大很慢)sudo apt install kali-linux-everything -y 
5:如果只需更新单独的软件,就无需执行4因为要很久,例如sudo apt install wpscan 
6:我自己倒是完成了最新更新,但是容器太大了几十G就不传了,需要的自行操作就行了```

4:(编译MCP),先npm install后直接npm run build,得到build目录,核心是index.js

5:(编译Docker镜像),

1:编译镜像:"docker build -t kali-pentest-mcp ."
2:部署镜像:"docker run --name kali-container -d --privileged -p 2222:22 kali-pentest-mcp"

6:安装MCP:

"kali-pentest-mcp-server": {
  "command": "node",
  "args": ["D:/kalimcp/build/index.js"],
  "env": {}
}

注意事项:

1: 每次重启docker后记得刷新MCP,因为可能SSH连接会断开

参考项目:

https://github.com/weidwonder/terminal-mcp-server

效果展示:

1:Lab: Blind SQL injection with out-of-band data exfiltration

2:command injection:

3:Lab: Web shell upload via Content-Type restriction bypass

MCP实时命令输出查看器使用指南

概述

这个实时查看器解决了在Cursor等AI工具中执行长时间命令时看不到实时输出的问题。通过WebSocket技术，您可以在浏览器中实时监控命令执行进度。

Related MCP server: redteam-mcp

快速开始

1. 启动实时查看器

Windows用户：

# 双击运行
start-realtime-viewer.bat

# 或者手动运行
cd realtime-viewer
npm install
npm start

Linux/Mac用户：

cd realtime-viewer
npm install
npm start

2. 打开Web界面

启动后，在浏览器中访问：

http://localhost:3000

3. 启用MCP服务器的实时推送

在Cursor或其他AI工具中，使用以下命令启用实时推送：

configure_realtime_viewer action=enable

或者配置自定义查看器URL：

configure_realtime_viewer action=configure viewer_url=http://localhost:3000

4. 执行命令并查看实时输出

现在当您执行交互式命令时，输出将实时显示在Web界面中：

start_interactive_command command="nmap -sS -O 192.168.1.1"

功能特性

Web界面功能

📊 会话列表 - 左侧显示所有活跃的命令会话
📺 实时输出 - 右侧显示选中会话的实时命令输出
🔄 自动滚动 - 可选的自动滚动到最新输出
🎨 VS Code风格 - 深色主题，类似VS Code的界面
📱 响应式设计 - 支持不同屏幕尺寸

MCP工具命令

查看实时推送状态

configure_realtime_viewer action=status

启用实时推送

configure_realtime_viewer action=enable

禁用实时推送

configure_realtime_viewer action=disable

配置查看器URL

configure_realtime_viewer action=configure viewer_url=http://localhost:3000

使用场景

1. 网络扫描

start_interactive_command command="nmap -sS -p- 192.168.1.0/24"

在Web界面中实时查看扫描进度和结果。

2. 漏洞扫描

start_interactive_command command="nikto -h http://target.com"

实时监控漏洞扫描的发现过程。

3. 密码破解

start_interactive_command command="hydra -l admin -P /usr/share/wordlists/rockyou.txt ssh://192.168.1.100"

实时查看密码破解尝试的进度。

4. 数据库操作

start_interactive_command command="mysql -u root -p"

在Web界面中查看SQL查询的执行结果。

环境变量配置

您可以通过环境变量配置MCP服务器：

# 启用实时推送（默认禁用）
set REALTIME_PUSH_ENABLED=true

# 配置查看器URL（默认 http://localhost:3000）
set REALTIME_VIEWER_URL=http://localhost:8080

# 重新启动MCP服务器
npm run build
npm start

故障排除

1. 连接问题

确保实时查看器服务器正在运行（http://localhost:3000）
检查防火墙设置
确认端口3000未被其他程序占用

2. 输出不显示

确认已启用实时推送：configure_realtime_viewer action=status
检查MCP服务器日志中的错误信息
确认命令是通过start_interactive_command启动的

3. 性能问题

对于输出量很大的命令，系统会自动缓冲输出以减少网络请求
可以通过清空输出按钮清理界面
关闭不需要的会话以释放资源

技术架构

┌─────────────────┐    HTTP/WebSocket    ┌──────────────────┐
│   MCP Server    │ ──────────────────► │ Realtime Viewer  │
│                 │                      │                  │
│ - CommandExecutor│                      │ - Express Server │
│ - RealtimePusher │                      │ - WebSocket      │
│ - SSH Sessions  │                      │ - Web Interface  │
└─────────────────┘                      └──────────────────┘
        │                                          │
        │ SSH                                      │ Browser
        ▼                                          ▼
┌─────────────────┐                      ┌──────────────────┐
│   Kali Linux    │                      │   Web Browser    │
│                 │                      │                  │
│ - Security Tools│                      │ - Real-time UI   │
│ - Command Line  │                      │ - Session Mgmt   │
└─────────────────┘                      └──────────────────┘

安全注意事项

本地使用 - 实时查看器默认只监听localhost，不对外网开放
无认证 - 当前版本没有身份验证，请勿在生产环境使用
敏感信息 - 命令输出可能包含敏感信息，请注意保护
网络安全 - 如需远程访问，请配置适当的网络安全措施

更新日志

v1.0.0

初始版本发布
支持实时命令输出显示
WebSocket通信
多会话管理
VS Code风格界面

Available Tools

5 tools

close_interactive_commandC

关闭交互式命令会话。

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`session_id`	Yes	交互式会话ID。

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('close') but doesn't explain what happens upon closing (e.g., whether resources are freed, if the session is terminated permanently, or any side effects). This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence in Chinese ('关闭交互式命令会话。') that directly states the purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (a mutation operation to close sessions), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like effects of closing, error conditions, or return values, making it inadequate for safe and effective use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the parameter 'session_id' documented as '交互式会话ID' (interactive session ID). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as format examples or sourcing details. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description '关闭交互式命令会话' (close interactive command session) clearly states the verb ('close') and resource ('interactive command session'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'execute_command' or 'start_interactive_command' beyond the 'close' action, missing specific sibling comparison.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an active session from 'start_interactive_command'), exclusions, or context for choosing it over other command-related tools, leaving usage unclear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

execute_commandB

(无需交互式比如ping 127.0.0.1)在Kali Linux渗透测试环境中执行命令。支持所有Kali Linux内置的安全测试工具和常规Linux命令。

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`command`	Yes	要在Kali Linux环境中执行的命令。可以是任何安全测试、漏洞扫描、密码破解等渗透测试命令。

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the environment (Kali Linux penetration testing) and command types, but lacks critical behavioral details: it doesn't specify execution context (e.g., shell, permissions, isolation), output handling, error behavior, security implications, or rate limits. For a command execution tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and front-loaded, with two sentences that directly address the tool's function and scope. The first sentence states the core purpose with a clarifying exclusion, and the second sentence expands on supported commands. There's minimal wasted text, though it could be slightly more structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity of a command execution tool in a security context, with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on execution behavior, output format, error handling, and security warnings, which are crucial for safe and effective use. The description doesn't compensate for the absence of structured data.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'command' parameter well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds marginal value by reinforcing the command types (security testing, vulnerability scanning, password cracking) and the Kali Linux context, but doesn't provide additional syntax, format, or constraint details beyond what the schema already states.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: '在Kali Linux渗透测试环境中执行命令' (execute commands in a Kali Linux penetration testing environment). It specifies the verb (execute) and resource (commands) with context (Kali Linux, penetration testing). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'start_interactive_command' or 'get_command_output', which appear related to command execution workflows.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides some implied usage context by mentioning '(无需交互式比如ping 127.0.1)' (no interactive commands like ping 127.0.0.1) and listing supported command types (security testing, vulnerability scanning, password cracking). However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'start_interactive_command' or provide clear exclusions beyond the interactive example.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

get_command_outputC

获取交互式命令的最新输出。

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`session_id`	Yes	交互式会话ID。

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but lacks critical behavioral details: it doesn't specify if this is a read-only operation (implied but not explicit), whether it returns only the latest output or a history, error conditions (e.g., invalid session), or performance characteristics like rate limits.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (interactive command output retrieval) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the output looks like (e.g., text, structured data), error handling, or dependencies on other tools like 'start_interactive_command'. For a tool with no structured behavioral hints, more context is needed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'session_id' documented as '交互式会话ID' (interactive session ID). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('获取' meaning 'get') and the resource ('交互式命令的最新输出' meaning 'latest output of interactive command'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'execute_command' (which runs commands) and 'send_input_to_command' (which sends input), but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'close_interactive_command' or 'start_interactive_command'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (like needing an active session), when not to use it, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'execute_command' for non-interactive output or 'send_input_to_command' for providing input.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

send_input_to_commandC

(自行判断是AI输入还是用户手动输入)向正在运行的交互式命令发送用户输入。

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end_line`	No	是否在输入后添加换行符。默认为true。
`input`	Yes	发送给命令的输入文本。
`session_id`	Yes	交互式会话ID。

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks critical behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read/write operation, potential side effects (e.g., command execution), error conditions, or response format. The mention of 'running interactive command' implies state dependency but doesn't elaborate on session management or failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is brief but includes a parenthetical note that adds complexity without clear value. It's front-loaded with the core action but could be more streamlined by removing the ambiguous parenthetical, which doesn't earn its place in a concise tool description.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and interaction with running commands (implying statefulness), the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover return values, error handling, or how it integrates with sibling tools for command lifecycle management, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to use it effectively in context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying 'input' is sent to a command and 'session_id' identifies an interactive session. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding of parameter usage or constraints.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('send user input') and target ('to a running interactive command'), which is specific and actionable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'execute_command' or 'get_command_output', and the parenthetical '(自行判断是AI输入还是用户手动输入)' adds some ambiguity about the source determination.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'execute_command' for non-interactive commands or 'close_interactive_command' to end sessions. It mentions 'running interactive command' but doesn't specify prerequisites or contrast with sibling tools, leaving usage context unclear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

start_interactive_commandB

(需要交互式比如mysql -u root -p)在Kali Linux环境中启动一个交互式命令，并返回会话ID。交互式命令可以接收用户输入,可以在不close_interactive_command的情况下同时执行execute_command。

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`command`	Yes	要在Kali Linux环境中执行的交互式命令。

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a session ID and that interactive commands can receive user input. However, it lacks critical behavioral details: whether this requires specific permissions in Kali Linux, what happens if the command fails to start, rate limits, or how the session ID is used with other tools. For a tool that starts interactive commands (potentially with security implications), this is inadequate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds useful context about interactivity and sibling tools. There's no wasted text, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating usage notes).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (starting interactive commands in Kali Linux), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the returned session ID looks like, how to use it with other tools, error conditions, or security considerations. For a tool with potential destructive capabilities and no structured safety hints, more guidance is needed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 100% (one parameter 'command' with description '要在Kali Linux环境中执行的交互式命令'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it emphasizes that the command should be interactive (e.g., 'mysql -u root -p') and mentions the Kali Linux environment, but doesn't provide additional syntax, format, or validation details for the command parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: '在Kali Linux环境中启动一个交互式命令，并返回会话ID' (start an interactive command in Kali Linux environment and return a session ID). It specifies the verb ('启动' - start), resource ('交互式命令' - interactive command), and environment ('Kali Linux环境中'). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'execute_command' which might also execute commands but not return session IDs for interactive sessions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: for interactive commands that require user input (e.g., 'mysql -u root -p'). It mentions the relationship with sibling tools: '可以在不close_interactive_command的情况下同时执行execute_command' (can execute execute_command without closing interactive_command). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or provide alternatives for non-interactive commands.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

5 tool updatesv1.0.0Aug 18, 2025
- First observedclose_interactive_command
- First observedexecute_command
- First observedget_command_output
- First observedsend_input_to_command
- First observedstart_interactive_command

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Scored 2026-04-18 10:40 across 5 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose within the interactive command lifecycle: start_interactive_command initiates sessions, send_input_to_command provides input, get_command_output retrieves output, close_interactive_command terminates sessions, and execute_command handles non-interactive commands. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case naming (e.g., start_interactive_command, close_interactive_command). The naming is predictable and readable throughout the set, with no deviations in style or convention.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, this server is well-scoped for managing interactive and non-interactive commands in a Kali Linux environment. Each tool serves a specific role in the command lifecycle, and there are no extraneous or missing tools for this focused purpose.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides complete coverage for the domain of command execution in Kali Linux, including starting, interacting with, monitoring, and terminating both interactive and non-interactive commands. There are no obvious gaps, and agents can handle full command workflows without dead ends.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

GitHub Repository

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

MCP FortressOAuth
io.github.mcp-fortress
Security scanner for MCP servers. Detect vulnerabilities, prompt injection, and tool poisoning.
Security Testing & QA Tools Penetration Testing
2
mcp-server
com.pentest-tools
MCP server for Pentest-Tools.com: run scans, manage findings and reports via your preffered LLM.
Penetration Testing Security
23
pentest-mcp-server A
io.github.cyanheads
Offline methodology engine for authorized penetration testing, CTF, and security research.
Penetration Testing Security
721
meok-mcp-hardening-mcp
io.github.CSOAI-ORG
MEOK MCP Hardening MCP — automated security red-team for any MCP server. Maps OWASP LLM Top 10
Penetration Testing Security
1

Related MCP Servers

Security Testing MCP Server
Penetration Testing Security Testing & QA Tools
avi686
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Provides penetration testing tools including nmap, nikto, sqlmap, wpscan, and exploit database searches for educational and authorized security testing purposes using Kali Linux tools.
Updated a year ago (2025-09-25 18:28 UTC)
-
redteam-mcp
Penetration Testing Shell Access
samirjani03
F
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
A penetration testing MCP server that runs 20 hacking tools inside a Kali Linux Docker container, enabling AI assistants to execute security scans and attacks via natural language.
Updated 23 days ago (2026-08-17 09:33 UTC)
2
-
mcp-vanguard
Penetration Testing Open Data
skyvanguard
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
A security pentesting MCP server with 89 tools across 10 categories, enabling comprehensive reconnaissance, web security, OSINT, and exploitation tasks. It features a native Windows/WSL bridge for Kali Linux tools and scope-aware permission tiers for safe and efficient scanning.
Updated 7 months ago (2026-02-22 23:42 UTC)
3
MIT
MCP-Kali-Server
Penetration Testing Command Line
lvyimu
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
Enables AI-assisted penetration testing by connecting MCP clients to execute terminal commands on a Kali Linux machine, supporting tools like Nmap, Metasploit, and custom commands.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-06-14 16:37 UTC)
MIT

Appeared in Searches

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

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/sfz009900/kalilinuxmcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server