ai.mangii/manga
version 1.4.0
- scanned 2026-10-16
- source github.com/AAAIStudio/mangii-mcp
- commit 99f770fba7ea
- transport streamable-http
- methodology 0.2.0
No tag matching version 1.4.0 was found in this repository, so the scan read the default branch instead. The findings below describe that code, not necessarily the released version.
not assessed
no source files in a language the ruleset covers (python, javascript, typescript, go)
80measured on 65% of this axis
not assessed
no lockfile in the fetched source; dependency versions are unresolved, so no vulnerability can be attributed
66measured on 70% of this axis
0
The evidence
Every deduction below names the artefact that produced it. Nothing on this page was executed: the source was read, never run, and no running server was contacted.
Auth Posture
- authentication_model
credential requirement present; enforcement partially evidenced
- transport_security
declared endpoint(s) are HTTPS: https://mcp.mangii.ai/mcp; scored 80, not 100: `03` §4 reserves 100 for HTTPS *with HSTS*, and an HSTS header can only be seen by connecting, which `04` §9 does not do. This is an unverifiable band, not an observed absence.
- secret_handling
detect-secrets matched 1 credential-shaped string(s), every one from a keyword or entropy heuristic (Secret Keyword). Those flag placeholders, variable names and content hashes as readily as credentials, so they do not establish the committed credential `03` §4's 0 asserts, and this sub-check is not scored; Secret Keyword at README.md:60
- authorization_granularity
no tool registration was recognised anywhere in the source. An MCP server registers tools by definition, so this is a gap in our detection rather than a server with none, and `03` §4's threshold cannot be applied to it.
Maintenance
- recency
last commit 54 day(s) before 2026-10-16
- issue_responsiveness
lifetime median (1 issue(s) in the last 6 months, under `03` §5's floor of 3): 7.9 day(s) to first maintainer comment
- release_cadence
this repository publishes neither releases nor version tags
- bus_factor
sole maintainer
- repository_signals
`03` §5 scores this by quartile WITHIN the server's category, which needs a distribution across every scanned server and so cannot be computed while scanning one. It is a post-pass over the crawl and that pass does not exist yet.
Transparency
- license
no LICENSE file and no license field in any package manifest — `03` §7: without a license, a consumer has no grant to use the server at all
- readme_quality
README.md: over the size floor but none of `03` §7's content heuristics matched
- declared_scopes
neither the README nor the MCP manifest documents what the server accesses or what side effects it has
- changelog
no CHANGELOG in the fetched source. `03` §7's partial credit for tagged releases carrying release notes is not applied here — that needs the forge API, which this check does not call
- security_contact
no SECURITY.md and no disclosure contact in the README, so a finder has no route to report a vulnerability privately
Contest a finding
Every number here comes from a rule reading published source, and rules get things wrong. If something on this page is incorrect — or correct but mitigated by a check the rule cannot see — open an issue and we answer it in writing. A finding we got wrong is removed and the rule is fixed; one that stands is answered on the record.
Anyone can file: the maintainer, a researcher who disagrees with the classification, or a user who tested the server and could not reproduce it. Name this server and the rule or advisory ID shown beside the finding above. We aim to reply within five business days and to resolve within ten.