Head to head
MCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor vs FlowSentry
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
Static AST security scanner detecting command injection, leaked secrets, and SSRF in MCP tools.
Full listingFlowSentry
Fio.github.vasilicasijarvis/flowsentryNo reviews yet
Security scanner for n8n workflows + live MCP Trust-Check. 18 rules, OWASP mapped. Paid x402 API.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours MCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor (75/100 against 17). MCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor has noticeably more public adoption.
| MCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor | FlowSentry | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | B75/100 | F17/100 |
| Adoption | Growing | New |
| GitHub stars | 0 | – |
| Downloads / week | – | – |
| Runs where | Hosted (remote) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | Yes | Yes |
| Tools | — | 3 |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | MIT | — |
| Last release | 2026-09-19 | — |
| Category | Security | Security |
Other comparisons
MCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor vs Security PreflightMCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor vs Security Txt Cra LintMCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor vs DraugrMCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor vs ScanLabsAI Security ScannerMCP Security & Vulnerability Auditor vs Reversecore MCPAll Security servers