ai.nudg3/brand-intelligence
version 1.1.0
- scanned 2026-10-16
- source github.com/NUDG3-AI/nudg3-mcp
- transport streamable-http
- files read 25
- methodology 0.2.0
- ruleset 0.1.1
100
94measured on 80% of this axis
not assessed
no lockfile in the fetched source; dependency versions are unresolved, so no vulnerability can be attributed
not assessed
this server's declared repository could not be read through the GitHub API, so `03` §5's maintenance signals were not retrieved — note that a private repository and an absent one are indistinguishable from outside
33
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
auth enforcement present at a call site in the source (inbound token verification) and documented in the README; "refused without credentials" (`03` §4) established by reading the code rather than by connecting
- transport_security
declared endpoint(s) are HTTPS: https://mcp.nudg3.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 10 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 PKG-INFO:67; Secret Keyword at README.md:29; Secret Keyword at tests/test_client.py:13; Secret Keyword at tests/test_client_forwarded_for.py:22; Secret Keyword at tests/test_insights_tools.py:17; Secret Keyword at tests/test_middleware.py:107; Secret Keyword at tests/test_middleware.py:118; Secret Keyword at tests/test_middleware.py:130; Secret Keyword at tests/test_tools.py:20; Secret Keyword at tests/test_workspace_resolution.py:27
- authorization_granularity
11 tool registrations with conditional access logic present in the same source
Maintenance
- recency
no last-commit date was retrieved for this repository
- issue_responsiveness
no issue-response median was retrieved. An unanswered issue scores 0 under `03` §5, but an absent measurement is not an unanswered issue.
- release_cadence
no release history was retrieved for this repository
- bus_factor
no contributor history was retrieved for this repository
- 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
pyproject.toml declares 'MIT' but no LICENSE file ships with the source
- readme_quality
README.md: installation instructions (+25), configuration documented (+25), exposed tools or resources enumerated (+30), states what the server does in the first 200 words (+20)
- 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.