Unreleased: not public yet. Maintainers have not reviewed this result.
Results / duckduckgo-mcp-server
duckduckgo-mcp-server
A
Protocol4/4 points
A
Network2/2 points
Coverage: low (1 of 3 tools reached with a valid call).
Protocol checks
| Check | Verdict | What happened |
|---|---|---|
| protocol Valid MCP handshake and tool schemas | pass | handshake ok, 3 well-formed tool(s) |
| tool-poisoningcritical No tool-poisoning indicators in tool metadata | pass | scanned 3 tool definition(s), including parameter text: nothing suspicious |
| robust-input Survives malformed tool input | pass | 12 invalid call(s) rejected cleanly |
| secret-echocritical No environment secret echoed in responses | pass | canary secrets absent from tools/list and 12 captured response(s) |
Network checks
| Check | Verdict | What happened |
|---|---|---|
| net-loopback-ssrfcritical Refuses loopback targets (SSRF) | pass | all 9 loopback probes were explicitly refused (the response said so) and the listener saw no request or connection |
| net-scheme-allowlistcritical Only http(s) schemes accepted | pass | 7 probes with file:, ftp:, gopher:, dict:, data: and javascript: URLs had no observable effect (a scheme the HTTP library does not support passes trivially) |
| net-caps Response size and time are capped | n/a | the server refused loopback targets (net-loopback-ssrf passed), so there is no harness-owned URL it will fetch; response size and time caps were not measured |
| net-redirect Redirects are re-validated | n/a | the server refused or never reached the loopback listener, so redirect handling could not be observed (a server that blocks loopback cannot be sent a redirect it would follow) |
What was not covered
- Database: Not applicable. Server config has no {dsn}/{host}/... Placeholder, so the harness cannot start the server once per role
- HTTP: Not applicable. The server is started over stdio; the http pack needs server.url
- Files: Not applicable. No tool is classified as taking a file path with medium confidence or higher
- Git: Not applicable. No tool is classified as taking a git repository path with medium confidence or higher
- SQLite: Not applicable. No tool takes a SQL string
- Effects: Not applicable. No tool declares annotations, so there is nothing to compare with what the sandbox observed
- Tools that a server lists only for clients that declare roots, sampling or elicitation capabilities are not seen: the harness declares none
- Tool "search" is covered by the core checks only: argument "query" is not clearly SQL (nothing in the tool name, its description or the argument's description mentions sql, a database or a table); add it under tools: to include it
- Tool "expand_link" is covered by the core checks only: string parameters only, and none names a path, URL, command, SQL or repository; add it under tools: to include it
- SSRF: link-local and private-range addresses are never contacted; redirects from a public host to loopback and DNS rebinding are not tested (the harness contacts only its own loopback listener)
- The sandbox is a convention the harness follows, not a security boundary. A malicious server runs with your user's privileges, sees the real file system and network, and can ignore cwd, HOME and PATH. Run untrusted servers in a throwaway VM or container.
- Prompt injection carried in tool output (only tool metadata is scanned)
- Authentication and transport security
- Audit logging (not measured by these packs; only the db pack has an advisory audit check)
Run it yourself
Started with the standard settings like this; put it in sealmark.yaml as the server:
uvx duckduckgo-mcp-server==0.7.0
Each of 613 verdicts was checked independently, and Sealmark was wrong on some: how reliable Sealmark is.
Think a verdict is wrong, or want a server removed? Email disclosure@sealmark.dev with the server version. We recheck, correct the page if we were wrong, and add your reply. See the disclosure policy.