.well-known— mcp server

.well-known — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.

by JSONbored·MCP Server·github.com/JSONbored/metagraphed
6stars36forksReview on GitHub →

Is .well-known safe to install?

SaferSkills independently audited .well-known (MCP Server) and scored it 96/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 1 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.

Score
96/100
●●●●●●●●●●
↑ +0 since first scan (96 → 96)Re-scan~30s
Latest scan
ScannedJun 24, 2026 · 32d ago
Scans run1 over 90 days
Detectors55 checks · 5 categories
Findings1 warnings · 0 high
EngineSaferSkills 2b638c6
View methodology →
SaferSkills installs
This week0
This month0
All time0
CategoryWeightCategory scoreContribution
Securityprompt, exec, net, exfil, eval
35%
88
30.8 pts
Supply chainhash, typosquat, maintainer, lockfile
20%
100
20.0 pts
Maintenancestaleness, pinning, CI
15%
100
15.0 pts
TransparencySKILL.md, perms, README
15%
100
15.0 pts
Communityinstalls, verify, response
15%
100
15.0 pts

Findings & checks · 1 flagged

Securityscore 88 · 1 finding
MEDIUMInstruction telling the agent not to ask for approvalSS-SKILL-INJECT-DONT-ASK-01 · Prompt injection · CONTRIBUTING.md
MEDIUM — it fires on intent; the real damage depends on the host agent's own approval-gating.
Why it matters

The text {match} tells the agent to skip the normal "ask the user first" gate. Used adversarially it removes the human-in-the-loop check before destructive or sensitive actions, turning a normally-gated agent into a fire-and-forget executor.

The exact value spotted
excerptCONTRIBUTING.md· markdown
108**If we close your PR by mistake, that's on us** — we may reopen or re-review at our discret
… (81 chars elided on L108)
109 
110**Don't ask for or chase reviews.** The queue is automated and best-effort, and the gate pos
… (108 chars elided on L110)
111 
112**Scoring and rewards are not ours to grant.** Contribution scoring and any Gittensor reward
… (108 chars elided on L112)
Occurrences
1 occurrence · at L110
How to fix
Remove the approval-skipping instruction, or scope it narrowly to a specific safe, reversible action.
  1. Delete blanket "don't ask / no need to confirm" directives from the skill.
  2. If the skill is a genuine autonomous job, restrict the opt-out to a named non-destructive action rather than all actions.
Framework references
OWASPLLM01ATLASAML.T0051
Trace & refs
ruleSS-SKILL-INJECT-DONT-ASK-01sha25615dae9807bd892c6…rubric 365aacaView on GitHub
Supply chainscore 100 · 0 findings
✓—All supply chain checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Maintenancescore 100 · 0 findings
✓—All maintenance checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Transparencyscore 100 · 0 findings
✓—All transparency checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Communityscore 100 · 0 findings
✓—All community checks passedNo findings in this category for the latest scan.pass
Vendor response · right of reply
Are you the maintainer? Submit a response →

Audit the pieces. Scan the whole. Decide.

~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.

Scan a GitHub repoBrowse capabilities