io.github.quotewise/mcp
version 1.0.3
- scanned 2026-10-16
- source github.com/quotewise/mcp
- commit 30aadb44f295
- transport streamable-http
- files read 1
- methodology 0.2.0
- ruleset 0.1.1
No tag matching version 1.0.3 was found in this repository, so the scan read the default branch instead. The findings below describe that code, not necessarily the released version.
100
75measured on 85% of this axis
not assessed
no lockfile in the fetched source; dependency versions are unresolved, so no vulnerability can be attributed
47measured on 45% of this axis
43
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
registry declares credential header(s) Authorization that are not required on every declared endpoint, and the source we fetched shows no enforcement — `03` §4's "authentication present but optional" band; 1 of 1 declared remote endpoint(s) require no credential header: https://mcp.quotewise.io/
- transport_security
declared endpoint(s) are HTTPS: https://mcp.quotewise.io/; 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
no committed credential found, and no environment variable with a credential-shaped name is read anywhere in the source
- 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 248 day(s) before 2026-10-16
- issue_responsiveness
this repository has no issues `03` §5's window covers. An unanswered issue scores 0 under §5, but a repository with no issues filed has not failed to answer one.
- release_cadence
a release exists but fewer than two fall inside `03` §5's 12-month window, so no median gap can be taken — and §5's remaining bands are all defined on that median. A limit of the methodology, not of this repository.
- bus_factor
2 regular authors in the last 12 months
- 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
LICENSE present with no SPDX-License-Identifier tag; identified as 'MIT' from its text
- 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.