Is Cyberbro MCP Server safe to use?

Cyberbro MCP Server has an HVTrust score of 71.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #352 of 1374 tracked AI agent projects. This score reflects verifiable supply-chain integrity, transparency, maintenance, and adoption signals.

What is the trust score for Cyberbro MCP Server?

Cyberbro MCP Server scores 71.0/100 on HVTracker's evidence-weighted HVTrust scale. It has 19 GitHub stars and is categorized under MCP Servers.

Cyberbro MCP Server

Repository

Website

Using MCP is fun with Cyberbro!

MCP Servers Python Listed MIT

Is Cyberbro MCP Server safe? Promising trust profile, but some evidence still deserves review.

OSSF Scorecard 4.7 / 10

Provenance Attested

Signed commits 37%

Last push 23d ago

Advisories None known

Compare Cyberbro MCP Server

How does it stack up against its MCP Servers neighbours?

Pick any agent to compare →

Suggest a correction

In detail: Cyberbro MCP Server scores 71.0/100 (Grade B), ranked #352 of 1374 tracked open-source AI agent projects, on evidence coverage B (3 of 5 independent signal types). The public evidence: its packages ship with cryptographic provenance; OSSF Scorecard rates its supply-chain practices 4.7/10; 37% of recent commits are signed; no published advisory affects its latest release (mcp-cyberbro); last pushed 2026-10-18. Every point is earned from checkable signals — never paid placement. How scoring works →

How Cyberbro MCP Server could raise its score

Each line changes one public signal and recomputes with the live scoring function. The gains don't add up exactly, because the score is capped near the top.

Raise the OSSF Scorecard from 4.7 to 9.0lowest checks: Branch-Protection 0, CI-Tests 0, CII-Best-Practices 0 +9.0 → 80.0 A · #99 of 778
Sign every commit37% signed today +3.2 → 74.2 B · #164 of 778

Already done? Suggest a correction Add the trust badge

Chain of custody

Scanners check what the code says. This traces who ships Cyberbro MCP Server and whether that has changed: from the source repository, through how changes are reviewed and released, to the package you install. These are the checks for OWASP ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities.

Source Partly signed

github.com/stanfrbd/mcp-cyberbro, MIT, last pushed 2026-10-18. 37% of the last 100 commits carry a verified signature; the rest can't be tied to a verified identity.
Review and release Mixed

OpenSSF Scorecard rates the repository's practices 4.7/10 (scanned Nov 9, 2026). The checks that decide who can get a change released:
- Code Review0
- Branch Protection0
- Signed Releasesn/a
- Dangerous Workflow10
- Token Permissions0
- Pinned Dependencies3
All 18 Scorecard checks

Binary-Artifacts 10

Branch-Protection 0

CI-Tests 0

CII-Best-Practices 0

Code-Review 0

Contributors 0

Dangerous-Workflow 10

Dependency-Update-Tool 0

Fuzzing 0

License 10

Maintained 9

Packaging 10

Pinned-Dependencies 3

SAST 0

Security-Policy 10

Signed-Releases -1

Token-Permissions 0

Vulnerabilities 10
Published packages Linked and attested
- PyPI mcp-cyberbro Source link points back to this repo Build provenance attested
What you install today No known advisories

Latest release checked: mcp-cyberbro 0.0.6. No published advisory affects it (OSV, checked 2026-11-09).

Changes to this chain

2026-09-23 Package provenance attestation detected
2026-09-16 OSSF Scorecard: 4.1/10

Evidence behind this score

Coverage B: 3 of 5 independent evidence types found.

GitHub repository data
Package downloads
Supply-chain checks
Public actions (missing)
Community mentions (missing)

Verify this score yourself

Every build re-issues Cyberbro MCP Server’s score as an Ed25519-signed credential, valid for 7 days. You can check it offline against HVTracker’s published key; if anyone changes a number after signing, verification fails.

Signed credential (JSON) How to verify

What this score doesn’t check

It covers who ships the code, not what the code does. It doesn’t read tool descriptions or prompts for injected instructions, watch runtime behaviour, or find bugs nobody has disclosed yet. For that, run a content scanner before you connect it, such as Cisco MCP Scanner or Snyk Agent Scan.

How Cyberbro MCP Server compares in MCP Servers

#206 Ros MCP Server 71.1 +0.1
#207 shadcn-ui MCP Server 71.1 +0.1
#208 Cyberbro MCP Server 71.0 this agent
#209 Marketplaces MCP (RU) — Wildberries & Ozon 70.8 −0.2
#210 Scrcpy MCP 70.8 −0.2

Bars show each HVTrust score; the tick marks Cyberbro MCP Server’s 71.0.

Where the 71.0 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

71.0 / 100 · 100.0% confidence

Cyberbro MCP Server MCP Servers average (778 agents)

Safety / Integrity50% OSSF Scorecard · 30% provenance · 20% signed commits

15.2 / 25

4.4 above avg 10.8

Identity / Provenance60% listing status · 40% build provenance

18.0 / 18

4.3 above avg 13.7

Transparency50% declared license · 50% OSSF Scorecard

12.5 / 17

in line with avg 12.3

Maintenance60% last-push freshness · 40% commit activity

14.6 / 20

2.4 above avg 12.2

AdoptionLog-scaled stars · package downloads

5.0 / 20

2.6 below avg 7.6

Quick Trust Read

What Would Improve It

Increase the share of verified signed commits for clearer maintainer identity.

Recent Changes

2026-10-28

Rank Moved

Rank rose 32 spots (#341 → #309)

2026-10-26

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#324 → #336)

2026-10-18

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

Maintainer Checklist

Raise Scorecard signals Current OSSF Scorecard is 4.7/10. Tighten the weakest checks to improve public safety evidence.

Increase signed commits Raise the share of verified-signed commits to make maintainer identity and release history easier to trust.

Compare with another agent View MCP Servers Report missing data

47.5

Activity sub-score · out of 100

#208

In MCP Servers

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption. Grade B reflects the trust score band: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Evidence coverage B is separate — it grades how many independent signal types back the score (3 of 5), so a high score on thin evidence stays visible. Full methodology →

Rank Trend

2026-09-29 2026-11-10

Activity & Reach

Stars

Forks

Last Push

2026-10-18

23 days ago

Commits (4 wk)

Downloads (7d)

pypi

HN mentions (30d)

—

Open Issues

Rank Change

▼3

was #349

Analysis

Activity Inputs

47.5 / 100

StarsRepository reach

7.8 / 30

FreshnessLast push recency

21.8 / 25

ActivityRecent commits

13.0 / 25

CommunityFork signal

4.8 / 20

Common questions about Cyberbro MCP Server

Cyberbro MCP Server has a mixed signal profile. Some trust indicators are present, others are missing. Whether it is safe for your use case depends on which gaps matter to you — review the breakdown below before adopting in production.

Does Cyberbro MCP Server publish package provenance?

Yes. Cyberbro MCP Server's package releases carry build provenance attestations, which cryptographically link the published package back to its source repository and CI workflow.

Does Cyberbro MCP Server have an OpenSSF Scorecard?

Cyberbro MCP Server has an OpenSSF Scorecard score of 4.7/10. The Scorecard checks for branch protection, signed releases, dependency updates, fuzzing, code review, and other supply-chain hygiene items. See the full check breakdown on this page.

Is Cyberbro MCP Server actively maintained?

Maintained. Last push was 23 days ago.

What license does Cyberbro MCP Server use?

Cyberbro MCP Server ships under MIT. A declared, OSI-approved license is one of the transparency signals HVTrust scores.

Are Cyberbro MCP Server's commits signed?

37% of the last 100 commits to Cyberbro MCP Server are verified-signed (GPG, SSH, S/MIME, or GitHub's signing flow). Signed commits help confirm that code was authored by who the commit claims.

Not a safety endorsement. HVTracker describes what public signals show, not whether a project is safe for your use case. Run your own security review before adopting in production.

AI agent surface

MCP, providers, tool surface

Scored in HVTrust

These runtime-trust fields — detected from public repo docs and manifests — contribute a bounded adjustment to this project's HVTrust score alongside supply-chain evidence. The exact values each field can add or subtract are documented in the methodology → Compare this surface across every listed agent in the capability matrix →

MCP Server Support

medium confidence

Implemented

Cyberbro MCP Server appears to expose MCP server capabilities.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

External Service Dependencies

medium confidence

1 detected

Public provider/service dependencies detected.

Anthropic

Credential signal: No explicit API-key/config marker detected.

Tool / Plugin Surface

high confidence

Declared

Declared plugin/integration surface detected.

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

Package Provenance Drift

high confidence

Match

Published package metadata matches the tracked repo

Detailed evidence is not shown in the public view.

MCP signal live
External deps live
Tool / plugin surface live
Package provenance drift live

How this surface has changed

Detected changes to Cyberbro MCP Server's runtime surface and supply-chain posture, from daily public-signal snapshots. A change here means our detectors see something different — a genuinely changed capability, or better evidence of an existing one.

2026-09-24

Tool Surface Changed

Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared

2026-09-24

Provider Added

Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Anthropic

2026-09-24

Mcp Status Changed

Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented

2026-09-23

Provenance Added

Package provenance attestation detected

Maintain Cyberbro MCP Server?

For maintainers

HVTrust scores Cyberbro MCP Server from public signals only — we never contact maintainers first. If a signal is wrong, stale, or missing (provenance you publish, a Scorecard you run, signed releases), tell us and we'll review it. Corrections are public and tracked on GitHub.

Submit a correction → Add the trust badge

Reputation Timeline

Signal history

2026-10-28

Rank Moved

Rank rose 32 spots (#341 → #309)

2026-10-26

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#324 → #336)

2026-10-18

Grade Changed

Trust grade C → B

2026-10-18

Rank Moved

Rank rose 281 spots (#601 → #320)

2026-10-18

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 9.2pts (62.7 → 71.9)

2026-10-18

Activity Score Changed

Activity score up 23pts (27 → 51)

2026-10-16

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 15 spots (#593 → #608)

2026-10-15

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 12 spots (#581 → #593)

2026-10-12

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 14 spots (#562 → #576)

2026-10-09

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 10 spots (#549 → #559)

2026-10-04

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#528 → #541)

2026-09-24

Tool Surface Changed

Detected tool/plugin surface changed: none → declared

2026-09-24

Provider Added

Runtime surface grew — new detected provider dependency: Anthropic

2026-09-24

Mcp Status Changed

Detected MCP server support changed: none → implemented

2026-09-24

Rank Moved

Rank rose 42 spots (#553 → #511)

2026-09-23

Provenance Added

Package provenance attestation detected

2026-09-23

Grade Changed

Trust grade D → C

2026-09-23

Rank Moved

Rank rose 590 spots (#1143 → #553)

2026-09-23

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 41.6pts (20.8 → 62.4)

2026-09-22

Newly Listed

First tracked at rank #1143

2026-09-21

Removed From Active Tracking

Removed from active tracking

2026-09-16

Scorecard Added

OSSF Scorecard: 4.1/10

2026-09-16

Rank Moved

Rank rose 266 spots (#757 → #491)

2026-09-16

HVTrust Changed

HVTrust up 8.5pts (55.5 → 64.0)

2026-09-12

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 15 spots (#727 → #742)

2026-09-11

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#714 → #727)

2026-09-07

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 79 spots (#613 → #692)

2026-09-06

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 13 spots (#600 → #613)

2026-09-05

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 70 spots (#530 → #600)

2026-09-04

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 22 spots (#508 → #530)

2026-09-03

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 39 spots (#469 → #508)

2026-09-02

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 14 spots (#455 → #469)

2026-09-01

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 14 spots (#441 → #455)

2026-08-31

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 36 spots (#405 → #441)

2026-08-30

Rank Moved

Rank rose 20 spots (#425 → #405)

2026-08-29

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 17 spots (#408 → #425)

2026-08-26

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 40 spots (#357 → #397)

2026-08-24

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 17 spots (#334 → #351)

2026-08-22

Rank Moved

Rank rose 15 spots (#349 → #334)

2026-08-19

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 20 spots (#331 → #351)

2026-08-13

Rank Moved

Rank dropped 18 spots (#319 → #337)

GitHub → Website → PyPI: mcp-cyberbro

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

For maintainers

Markdown:
            [![HVTrust](https://hvtracker.net/badge/cyberbro-mcp-server.svg)](https://hvtracker.net/agents/cyberbro-mcp-server)
            
HTML:
            <a href="https://hvtracker.net/agents/cyberbro-mcp-server"><img src="https://hvtracker.net/badge/cyberbro-mcp-server.svg" alt="HVTrust"></a>

Other agents in MCP Servers

Data sources
GitHub REST API (repo, commits, stars, forks, license) · PyPI / pypistats (downloads, provenance) · OpenSSF Scorecard CLI
Each agent's signals refresh once daily across 6 staggered batches. Methodology v4.4 · Raw JSON

Cyberbro MCP Server

How Cyberbro MCP Server could raise its score

Chain of custody

Source Partly signed

Review and release Mixed

Published packages Linked and attested

What you install today No known advisories

Changes to this chain

Evidence behind this score

Verify this score yourself

What this score doesn’t check

How Cyberbro MCP Server compares in MCP Servers

Where the 71.0 comes from

HVTrust dimensions vs the MCP Servers average

Quick Trust Read

Rank Trend

Activity & Reach

Analysis

Activity Inputs

Common questions about Cyberbro MCP Server

AI agent surface

Maintain Cyberbro MCP Server?

Reputation Timeline

Embed Badge Badge guide for maintainers →

Other agents in MCP Servers