Heimdall

io.github.caglarbozkurt由 GitHub 帳號 caglarbozkurt 發布v0.5.1更新於 Oct 24, 2026

Scan an MCP server or agent config for injection, exfiltration, and risky capabilities.

已驗證STDIO僅桌面開發者工具安全與監控

概覽

AI 產生的概覽

本機預檢安全掃描器,讓助理在接入前靜態審查 MCP 伺服器或代理設定中的注入、資料外洩與高風險能力。

可以做什麼
掃描目標(npm 或 PyPI 套件、本機目錄、git 儲存庫、tools.json 匯出或 MCP 用戶端設定),產出附 file:line 或 tool:name 證據的評分報告。檢查工具描述中的注入與工具投毒,並盤點檔案系統、網路、shell、eval 與憑證存取能力。追蹤從密鑰到網路、從 fetch 到 eval 的已證實資料流路徑。稽核整個代理設定中的跨伺服器外洩鏈與工具名稱衝突,並比對基準偵測漂移。依預設、嚴格或自訂政策將結果判定為通過、警告或失敗,可選輸出 JSON 或 SARIF。
適用情境
在安裝或連線不熟悉的 MCP 伺服器之前使用,或用於稽核現有代理設定。也適合在 CI 中把關 MCP 設定,讓有風險的伺服器使建置失敗。
執行需求
透過 npm 套件 mcp-heimdall-scan 以 npx 在使用者機器上作為本機程序執行;未宣告需要帳號、API 金鑰或環境變數。預設離線運作;可選的線上 CVE 檢查會連線 OSV.dev。僅限桌面端。
安裝前請注意
它是啟發式預檢,不是保證:通過不代表安全,標記只表示需要複核,而非已證實惡意。線上選項會把相依套件名稱與版本傳送給 OSV.dev。handshake 與 validate 模式會執行不受信任的伺服器程式碼,且並非真正的沙箱;MCP 工具本身僅做靜態分析,不暴露這些模式。

安裝

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 開啟 儀表板中的 Heimdall,將其新增到工作區。
  2. 為需要使用其工具的對話啟用該服務。

Desktop only,透過 STDIO。 STDIO 服務會啟動本機處理程序,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面主機。

其他 MCP 客戶端

參照 儲存庫 中的啟動說明。

README

[Heimdall]

Heimdall

The watchman at your agent's gate.

A local, pre-flight security scanner for Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers — vet a server, or a whole agent config, before your agent trusts it. No account, no backend, and it never runs the server by default.

[npm] [CI] [downloads] [license] [node] [try in your browser]

[mcp-heimdall MCP server]


MCP servers are unvetted code with a natural-language attack surface: their tool descriptions go straight to your model, and the server runs with your machine's access. Heimdall scores what a server can actually do — not what it claims — and cites the exact evidence. It runs entirely on your machine, needs no account, and never executes the server by default, so you can vet a package before you install it and gate it in CI.

Quickstart

bash
npx mcp-heimdall-scan firecrawl-mcp                   # scan a published servernpx mcp-heimdall-scan ./claude_desktop_config.json    # audit your whole agent confignpx mcp-heimdall-scan firecrawl-mcp --online          # + check its deps for known CVEs (OSV.dev)npx mcp-heimdall-scan ./my-server --policy strict     # gate it in CI

No install, runs locally, nothing leaves your machine.

Or try it in your browser: caglarbozkurt.github.io/mcp-heimdall — the full scanner runs 100% client-side (npm packages are fetched via jsDelivr; or paste a tools.json / MCP config). No backend, nothing uploaded. Local paths and --handshake need the CLI.

What it checks

CheckWhat it catches
🧬 Injectiontool-poisoning across tools, resources & prompts — override, concealment, hidden chars, fake <IMPORTANT> tags
🔓 Capabilityfilesystem, network, shell, eval, and specific credential access (SSH / AWS / keychain / .env)
🎯 Proven exfil pathsdata-flow that proves secret → network or fetch → eval, file:line → file:line
📦 Provenance & depsinstall-time scripts, missing repo/license, capabilities inherited from dependencies
🛡️ Known CVEs (opt-in)declared dependencies checked against the OSV.dev advisory DB — real CVE IDs, severity-ranked (--online)
🕸️ Compositionaudits a whole config: cross-server exfiltration chains & tool-name collisions
🔁 Driftfingerprints the surface — a silently changed tool description (rug-pull) is a hard fail

Every finding cites file:line or tool:name. Capability ≠ risk: raw power is shown as an informational profile and never fails the scan — only hard gates and real anomalies do.

What makes it different

  • Local, and it doesn't run the server. Everything is static and offline by default — no account, no backend, nothing uploaded — and it never executes untrusted code unless you opt into --handshake (documented for a disposable VM only). You vet a package before installing.
  • Proves the path. Taint/data-flow turns "reads files AND has network = fail" into a concrete, located flow — so it doesn't cry wolf on a config read plus an unrelated API call.
  • Sees the whole gate. It reasons across the set of servers you've configured — the cross-server exfil path neither server shows alone. Most scanners look at one at a time.
  • A gate you control. Detectors emit facts; a policy you define turns them into pass / warn / fail. Deny capabilities, require provenance, add audited waivers, gate CI.

Usage

bash
heimdall <target> [options]
TargetExample
local directoryheimdall ./servers/my-mcp
npm packageheimdall some-mcp-package
PyPI packageheimdall pypi:some-mcp-server
git repositoryheimdall https://github.com/user/repo
tools/list dumpheimdall tools.json
MCP client configheimdall ./claude_desktop_config.json
Options
--tools <file>     supplement analysis with a tools/list (or {tools,resources,prompts}) dump--policy <p>       "default", "strict", or a JSON policy file--baseline <file>  diff against a prior --json report (drift / rug-pull detection)--handshake        RUN the server(s) for the live tool list (untrusted code — VM/container only)--online           check declared deps against OSV.dev for known CVEs (sends dep names, not source)--json             machine-readable report--sarif            SARIF 2.1.0 (GitHub code-scanning / CI)--no-fail          always exit 0
Exit codes: 0 pass/warn · 1 fail · 2 error

Policies

Detectors emit facts; a policy turns them into the verdict. Ship the default, pick strict, or write your own procurement/security criteria:

Example policy (policy.example.json)
json
{  "name": "acme-procurement",  "denyCapabilities": ["exec", "dynamic-eval", "secret-access"],  "require": ["has_repository", "has_license"],  "failOnSeverity": "high",  "warnOnSeverity": "low",  "allow": [{ "id": "capability/scope-mismatch", "reason": "reviewed", "expires": "2026-12-31" }]}

Waivers carry a reason and optional expiry — an expired waiver lapses and re-flags.

Library

ts
import { scan } from "mcp-heimdall-scan";
const report = await scan("some-mcp-server", { policy: "strict" });if (report.verdict === "fail") throw new Error(report.reasons.join("; "));

Also ships as a Claude Code skill (skill/) — vet a server in-conversation before installing.

Use it as an MCP server

Give your agent a scan_mcp_server tool so it can vet a server before connecting to it — "scan this before you add it." Add Heimdall to your MCP client config:

json
{  "mcpServers": {    "heimdall": {      "command": "npx",      "args": ["-y", "--package", "mcp-heimdall-scan", "heimdall-mcp"]    }  }}

The tool takes target (npm package, pypi:<name>, path, GitHub URL, tools.json, or a client config), plus optional policy and online. It's static-only — it downloads but never executes the server, and the code-execution modes (--handshake, validate) are intentionally not exposed to the agent.

Use it in CI (GitHub Action)

Gate every pull request — scan your MCP config (or a server) and fail the build if it's risky. Add this to .github/workflows/:

yaml
- uses: caglarbozkurt/mcp-heimdall@v1  with:    target: ./claude_desktop_config.json   # a path, npm/pypi package, github URL, or tools.json    policy: strict                          # "default", "strict", or a JSON policy file    online: true                            # also check deps for known CVEs (OSV.dev)    sarif: heimdall.sarif                   # optional: emit SARIF for code scanning
InputDefaultDescription
target—what to scan (required)
policydefaultdefault, strict, or a path to a JSON policy
onlinefalsecheck dependencies for known CVEs via OSV.dev
sarif—write SARIF to this path (for github/codeql-action/upload-sarif)
fail-on-findingstruefail the job on a FAIL verdict (set false to report only)
versionlatestpin the mcp-heimdall-scan version for reproducible CI

Runs entirely on your own CI runner — no backend, and free on public repos.

Validate (behavioral cross-check)

Static analysis says what a server can do. heimdall validate checks that against what it actually does — it runs the server with a capability recorder preloaded (hooking fs / net / http(s) / child_process / vm / fetch / process.env), drives each tool, and diffs observed runtime behavior against the static flags:

bash
heimdall validate ./my-server            # one server: confirmed / missed / not-exercisedheimdall validate --list servers.txt     # batch: a recall number over observed behavior
  • confirmed — flagged and observed (the static claim held up).
  • not exercised — flagged but not triggered by naive args (a lower bound, not proof the flag is wrong).
  • missed — observed but not flagged → a real static gap to review (or an incidental library side effect).

So it's trustworthy for finding false negatives (static misses); it does not disprove a flag. Each server runs in a throwaway HOME + working directory with no inherited secrets, but it still runs the server and calls its tools (network/exec side effects) — use a disposable VM/container.

Behavioral run over 200 real packages (benchmarks/validate-run.md): 55 booted, 34 exercised an observable capability. Of the capabilities servers actually exercised at runtime, the static scan flagged 80.9% (55/68) — up from 75.8% after the first run's misses became a fix-list (we widened dependency-based network detection, which roughly halved the network misses). The misses that remain are structural: a capability exercised inside a dependency's internals or a subprocess, which static analysis fundamentally can't see — which is exactly why validate exists as the backstop. Honest recall, openly reported, improving run over run.

Tested at scale

Run against 2,500 real MCP packages from the npm registry (benchmarks/): 1,726 scanned in ~5 minutes, 0.7% flagged — robust on messy real-world code. Separately, it scores 100% on the small labeled fixture corpus (npm run eval, ~10 benign/malicious fixtures including the Damn Vulnerable MCP project) — a calibration check, not a broad real-world accuracy number; the field scans above are unlabeled and used only for robustness. Full log: benchmarks/field-run.md.

What that scan says about the ecosystem your agent trusts:

Of 1,726 real MCP servers…share
can run shell commands45%
make network calls67%
can eval code at runtime9%
can do both exec + network34%
touch credential files5%

The 0.7% flagged were driven by install-time code execution and prompt-injection — including real servers with hidden zero-width characters embedded in their tool descriptions, the kind of stealth tool-poisoning a keyword scanner sails past.

A robustness + distribution run is not an accuracy benchmark — the 2,500 servers are unlabeled. A flag means review this, not proven malicious.

Security & limitations

Heimdall is a heuristic pre-flight check, not a guarantee — a PASS isn't proof of safety. Capability, provenance, and CVE analysis cover JS/TS and Python; injection is language-agnostic. Proven taint/data-flow is JS/TS only — Python falls back to capability co-presence (a conservative gate, not a proven flow). Everything runs offline by default; --online is the one network call (it sends dependency names + versions to OSV.dev, never your source), and the CVE match is against the declared range, not a lockfile. --handshake runs untrusted code and is not a real sandbox. See SECURITY.md for the full threat model and how to report a vulnerability.

Contributing

New detection rules are the highest-value contribution — see CONTRIBUTING.md. By participating you agree to the Code of Conduct.

License

MIT · built by Çağlar Bozkurt

來源:README.md,提交 1844fb2

工具

0
SourceWeft 尚未在沙箱中啟動過該軟體包,因此其工具未知。

版本歷史

1
  1. v0.5.1最新Sep 16, 2026

評分

已滿足適用檢查項的 50%

該評分衡量此收錄條目的完整程度,依據註冊中心條目、端點與公開來源計算得出。它不是對伺服器本身的評價,也不表示伺服器安全或目前可用:可連通性是帶日期的檢查結果,評分也不包含安裝量或使用者評價。

  • 近 30 天內可連通25 分

    請保持端點能夠回應 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探測一次。

  • 已宣告認證方式10 分

    請在註冊中心條目中宣告憑證請求標頭,或保持端點能夠回應探測,以便判定其認證方式。

  • 已列出工具15 分

    請讓伺服器在無憑證時回應 tools/list,或發布可在沙箱中無憑證啟動的軟體包。

  • 描述必需15 分
  • 圖示10 分
  • 文件15 分
  • 授權條款10 分