Integrates with GitHub Actions for automated security scanning in CI/CD pipelines and supports SARIF output for integration with GitHub Code Scanning.
SpiderShield -- Security Scanner & Runtime Guard for MCP Servers
Security toolkit for MCP servers and AI agents. Static analysis, runtime policy enforcement, DLP, and audit logging -- from development to production.
What SpiderShield does
SpiderShield is a 5-subsystem security toolkit:
Subsystem | Command / API | What it does |
Static Scanner |
| Score tool descriptions, detect code vulnerabilities, rate overall quality (F/C/B/A/A+) |
Agent Security |
| 18 config checks, 15 malicious pattern detections, toxic flow analysis, rug pull detection |
Runtime Guard SDK |
| Pre/post-execution policy enforcement for tool calls |
MCP Proxy |
| Transparent security proxy between agent and MCP server |
DLP Engine | Built into Guard SDK | Scan tool outputs for PII/secrets, redact or block |
Install
pip install spidershieldRequires Python 3.11+. See SUPPORT.md for version compatibility and optional dependencies.
5-Minute Success Path
# 1. Install
pip install spidershield
# 2. Scan any MCP server
spidershield scan ./your-mcp-server
# 3. See what's wrong and how to fix it
spidershield rewrite ./your-mcp-server --dry-run
# 4. (Optional) Protect at runtime
spidershield proxy -- npx server-filesystem /tmpFor contributors:
git clone https://github.com/teehooai/spidershield && cd spidershield
make verify-oss # One command: install + lint + type check + test + scanQuick Start
Static scan (CI / development)
spidershield scan ./your-mcp-serverExample output:
SpiderShield Scan Report
modelcontextprotocol/servers/filesystem
+---------------------------------------------+
| Metric | Value | Score |
|-----------------------+-----------+---------|
| License | MIT | OK |
| Tools | 14 | OK |
| Security | 0 issues | 10.0/10 |
| Descriptions | | 3.2/10 |
| Architecture | | 10.0/10 |
| Tests | Yes | OK |
| | | |
| Overall | Rating: B | 7.6/10 |
| Improvement Potential | | 2.4/10 |
+---------------------------------------------+Runtime Guard SDK (production)
Enforce security policies on every tool call at runtime:
from spidershield import SpiderGuard, Decision
guard = SpiderGuard(policy="strict")
result = guard.check("read_file", {"path": "/etc/passwd"})
if result.decision == Decision.DENY:
print(result.reason) # "System file access blocked"
print(result.suggestion) # "Use application-level files instead"Policy presets:
Preset | Behavior |
| Deny by default, explicit allow list |
| Block known-dangerous patterns, allow common operations |
| Warn on suspicious patterns, allow most operations |
Custom YAML | Load your own policy file: |
With audit logging and DLP:
guard = SpiderGuard(
policy="strict",
audit=True, # Write audit trail to disk
audit_dir="./logs", # Custom audit directory
dlp="redact", # Scan outputs for PII/secrets, redact matches
)
# Pre-execution check
result = guard.check("query_db", {"sql": "SELECT * FROM users"})
# Post-execution DLP scan
clean_output = guard.after_check("query_db", raw_result)With data flywheel (opt-in telemetry to local SQLite):
guard = SpiderGuard(policy="balanced", dataset=True)
# Every check() call feeds the local dataset for scoring calibrationMCP Proxy (transparent protection)
Wrap any MCP server with SpiderShield policy enforcement:
from spidershield import guard_mcp_server
# Proxy between agent and server, enforcing "balanced" policy
guard_mcp_server(
["npx", "server-filesystem", "/tmp"],
policy="balanced",
audit=True,
)Or from the CLI:
spidershield proxy -- npx server-filesystem /tmp --policy balancedRewrite tool descriptions
SpiderShield can automatically rewrite tool descriptions to be action-oriented, with scenario triggers, parameter examples, and error guidance.
# Preview changes (no files modified)
spidershield rewrite ./your-mcp-server --dry-run
# Apply changes to source files
spidershield rewrite ./your-mcp-serverBefore (score 2.9):
"Shows the working tree status"After (score 9.6):
"Query the current state of the Git working directory and staging area.
Use when the user wants to check which files are modified, staged, or
untracked before committing."The rewriter works offline using templates (zero cost). Set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY for higher-quality LLM-powered rewrites.
Scan results across the MCP ecosystem
Server | Tools | Security | Descriptions | Overall | Rating |
filesystem | 14 | 10.0 | 3.2 | 7.6 | B |
git | 12 | 10.0 | 2.4 | 7.3 | B |
memory | 9 | 10.0 | 2.3 | 7.3 | B |
fetch | 1 | 9.0 | 3.5 | 7.3 | B |
supabase | 30 | 9.0 | 2.3 | 6.4 | B |
Full report: MCP-SECURITY-REPORT.md | Raw data: CURATION-REPORT.md
Try it on an example
The repo includes example MCP servers for instant demo:
git clone https://github.com/teehooai/spidershield
cd spidershield
spidershield scan examples/insecure-server # Rating: D (3.3/10)
spidershield scan examples/secure-server # Rating: D (4.7/10)What SpiderShield checks
Static Scanner
Security (weighted 35%)
Path traversal
Command injection / dangerous eval
SQL injection (Python + TypeScript)
SSRF (unrestricted network access)
Hardcoded credentials
Unsafe deserialization (pickle, yaml.load)
Prototype pollution (TypeScript)
Descriptions (weighted 35%)
Action verb starts ("List", "Create", "Execute")
Scenario triggers ("Use when the user wants to...")
Parameter documentation
Parameter examples
Error handling guidance
Disambiguation between similar tools
Length (too short = vague, too long = noisy)
Architecture (weighted 30%)
Test coverage (gradual: count-based)
Error handling (gradual: coverage-based)
README quality (gradual: length-based)
Type annotations
Dependency management
Environment configuration
License (pass/fail gate, not weighted)
MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD = OK
GPL, AGPL = warning
Missing = fail
Agent Security Checker
Scan AI agent installations for security misconfigurations and malicious skills.
spidershield agent-check ~/.openclawWhat it checks:
10 configuration security checks (auth, sandbox, SSRF, permissions, etc.)
20+ malicious skill patterns (reverse shells, credential theft, prompt injection)
Toxic flow detection -- flags skills that can read sensitive data AND send it externally
Typosquat detection for skill names
Excessive permission requests
Advanced options:
# Verify skill integrity (rug pull detection)
spidershield agent-check --verify
# Only approved skills allowed
spidershield agent-check --allowlist approved.json
# Strict mode: fail on any finding
spidershield agent-check --policy strict
# Ignore specific rules
spidershield agent-check --ignore TS-W001 --ignore typosquat
# Auto-fix configuration issues
spidershield agent-check --fix
# SARIF output for GitHub Code Scanning
spidershield agent-check --format sarif > results.sarifSkill pinning (rug pull protection):
spidershield agent-pin add ~/.openclaw/skills/my-skill/SKILL.md
spidershield agent-pin add-all
spidershield agent-pin verify # detect tampered skills
spidershield agent-pin list46 standardized issue codes across 4 categories:
Code | Category | Example |
TS-E001~E015 | Error (malicious) | Reverse shell, credential theft, prompt injection |
TS-W001~W011 | Warning (suspicious) | Typosquat, toxic flow, unapproved skill |
TS-C001~C018 | Config | No auth, sandbox disabled, SSRF enabled |
TS-P001~P002 | Pin | Verified, tampered |
Rating scale (SpiderRating)
Rating | Score | Meaning |
A | 8.5+ | Production-ready |
B | 7.0+ | Safe with minor suggestions |
C | 5.0+ | Usable, needs improvements |
D | 3.0+ | Significant issues |
F | <3.0 | Unsafe, do not deploy |
Formula: description * 0.35 + security_adjusted * 0.35 + architecture * 0.30
JSON output
spidershield scan ./server --format json
spidershield scan ./server --format json -o report.jsonGitHub Action
Add SpiderShield to your CI pipeline:
- uses: teehooai/spidershield@v0.3.0
with:
target: '.'
fail-below: '6.0'Commands
Command | Description |
| Scan and rate an MCP server |
| Rewrite tool descriptions |
| Suggest security hardening (advisory only) |
| Compare tool selection accuracy |
| Scan an AI agent for security issues |
| Manage skill pins for rug pull detection |
| Wrap any subprocess with security guard |
| MCP proxy with policy enforcement |
| Manage security policies |
| View guard audit logs |
| View data flywheel statistics |
| Add a benchmark entry |
| Re-run benchmarks |
| Run scoring calibration |
Threat model
SpiderShield provides both static analysis and runtime policy enforcement.
What it catches:
Ambiguous tool definitions that lead to agent misuse
Missing side-effect declarations (writes, deletes, network calls)
Unsafe permission patterns (unbounded file access, unrestricted queries)
Vague descriptions that give agents no operational boundaries
Malicious agent skills (reverse shells, credential theft, prompt injection)
Dangerous capability combinations (data exfiltration flows)
Insecure agent configurations (no auth, disabled sandbox, open DM policy)
Skill tampering (rug pull detection via content hashing)
PII/secret leakage in tool outputs (DLP engine)
Policy violations at runtime (Runtime Guard)
What it does NOT do:
Network traffic monitoring
Container-level sandboxing
Access control management (it enforces policies, not manages identities)
License
MIT