Skip to main content

Security report for mcpscan.ai

Technology · Iceland

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

mcpscan.ai is a specialized security scanning platform focused on the Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, providing vulnerability detection tailored to the unique challenges of MCP implementations. The platform offers detailed vulnerability taxonomies, educational resources, and scanning capabilities aimed at developers and security professionals working with MCP servers. The website demonstrates a consistent and professional brand with a clear focus on MCP security, supported by recent blog content and a knowledge base. Technically, the site is built using modern web technologies including React and Next.js, hosted with Cloudflare DNS services, and optimized for mobile devices. The site loads with moderate performance and good SEO practices, although accessibility features are basic. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses domain privacy protection, but lacks visible security headers and does not publish privacy, cookie, or incident response policies. The absence of contact information and formal policies reduces transparency and may impact user trust. The domain registration is recent but consistent with the business launch timeline, and privacy protection is justified given the security focus. Overall, mcpscan.ai presents a credible and focused service with room for improvement in privacy compliance and security transparency. Strategic enhancements in policy publication, contact availability, and security header implementation would strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  3. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching mcpscan.ai

This scan found 26 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
72
Security headers
30
Email security
40
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
60

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

mcpscan.ai occupies a niche market segment specializing in security scanning for MCP servers, differentiating itself from traditional security scanners by addressing LLM-specific vulnerabilities such as tool poisoning and confused deputy attacks. The business model appears to be SaaS-based with free and enterprise tiers, including private scanning options. Target customers are developers and security teams managing MCP servers. The company is newly founded in 2025, with a small team likely focused on technical excellence and thought leadership, as evidenced by detailed blog content and a comprehensive knowledge base. The use of privacy protection in WHOIS and Cloudflare DNS suggests a security-conscious operational posture. No partnerships or subsidiaries are disclosed, indicating an independent operation.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security posture with HTTPS enabled and domain transfer protections in place. However, the lack of DNSSEC and absence of explicit security headers in the HTML content are notable gaps. The site does not disclose privacy or cookie policies, nor does it provide incident response contact information, which are important for compliance and user trust. The detailed vulnerability taxonomy and blog content indicate strong domain expertise and awareness of MCP-specific security risks. Recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, publishing comprehensive privacy and security policies, adding security headers, and providing clear contact channels for incident response. These steps would enhance the overall security maturity and compliance posture.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  2. Implement and expose security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Provide clear contact information including security incident response channels (e.g., security@ or abuse@ emails).
  4. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to improve DNS security.
  5. Consider adding analytics with privacy-respecting configurations and disclose data retention policies.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Provides a security scanning service specialized for Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers to detect common vulnerabilities and ensure data and agent safety.
Key services
MCP server vulnerability scanning, Tool metadata scanning for poisoning, Security knowledge base and blog insights, Continuous monitoring and alerts (Enterprise tier)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Next.js, Cloudflare DNS, JavaScript, CSS
Frameworks
Next.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by URL and Cloudflare usage)
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited
  • Use of privacy protection for WHOIS

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the main page.
  3. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers provided.
  4. Strong focus on MCP server security with detailed vulnerability taxonomy and educational content.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and Cloudflare DNS.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected in the provided HTML.
  7. No signs of advertising or affiliate marketing.
  8. WHOIS data shows privacy protection and domain age consistent with business launch.
  9. No security headers explicitly visible in HTML content; likely handled at server or CDN level.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React and Next.js stack, leveraging Cloudflare for DNS and likely CDN services. The HTML content is well-structured with appropriate meta tags for SEO and social sharing (Open Graph and Twitter cards). Fonts are preloaded for performance optimization. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and uses CSS backdrop filters for visual effects. No CMS or third-party analytics/tracking scripts were detected, indicating a lightweight and privacy-focused implementation. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous script loading. The absence of explicit security headers in the HTML suggests reliance on server or CDN configurations. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and suitable for the target audience, with opportunities to enhance security and privacy features.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with mcpscan.ai. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review mcpscan.ai.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.