VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents MCP server

• aadhaar_maskFree

  Mask + Verhoeff-validate an Aadhaar number. Returns masked form, validity, and an owner-scoped reference token. No persistence of the raw value. Stateless validator: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• ai_act_classifyFree

  Before you build or ship an AI feature, check where it lands under the EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689). Describe the use case (with biometric / remote-identification / automated-decision / social-scoring / GPAI flags) and VITNA returns the risk tier (prohibited / high-risk / limited-risk / minimal-risk), GPAI obligations, and the per-tier obligations you would have to meet. A classification for you to act on: VITNA evaluates and records, it does not gate the build.

• breach_classifyFree

  After a security incident, check whether it is legally reportable before you decide how to respond. Give the incident facts (affected count, data categories, sensitivity, recovery state) and VITNA returns reportability + reasoning + the notification deadline + who to notify, across DPDP §8, GDPR Art 33, CPRA §1798.82, LGPD Art 48, PDPA §26B, and US-FED sectoral. This makes the full incident decision from the facts; for a quick per-US-state deadline/recipient/threshold table without incident facts, use us_state_breach_deadline. VITNA evaluates and records; acting on the result is up to you.

• consent_checkFree

  Before you process someone's personal data, ask VITNA whether an active consent actually permits it for this purpose. Give the data principal + purpose (and optional category); returns { allowed, reason, matching_consent_id, principal_id }, a determination you must honour yourself since VITNA evaluates and records but does not enforce. Use this for personal-data processing legality; for a dangerous technical action (shell / file / DB / network) use vitna_preflight instead.

• cpf_validateFree

  Validate a Brazilian CPF (mod-11 check digits, rejects all-same). Stateless validator: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• dpia_threshold_checkFree

  Before you start a new processing activity, check whether the law requires a DPIA first (GDPR Art 35 / DPDP §10 / LGPD Art 38). Give the purpose + data categories (and scale / systematic-monitoring / automated-decision / cross-border / vulnerable-subjects flags); returns dpia_required + the 9-criterion WP29 analysis + jurisdiction guidance, so you know whether to pause and assess before proceeding.

• global_compliance_mapFree

  Master catalogue of every privacy/security/sectoral regime VITNA has fabric for (28 entries covering 24 named statutes). Stateless lookup: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• gstin_validateFree

  Validate a GSTIN format + mod-36 check digit; returns state code lookup. Stateless validator: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• iban_validateFree

  Validate an IBAN format + ISO 7064 mod-97 check digit; supports 71 countries. Stateless validator: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• india_cross_border_statusFree

  Before you transfer personal data out of India, check the destination country's DPDP §16 status (permitted / restricted / sectoral_restricted) plus any RBI / SEBI / IRDAI caveats. Pass the ISO-3166 alpha-2 country code (e.g. US). Stateless lookup: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• india_regulators_directoryFree

  Static reference directory of Indian data and sector regulators (DPB, RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, TRAI, DoT, PFRDA, MeitY, MCA), optionally filtered by sector: a lookup of who exists and what they cover. To instead work out which of them apply to a specific processing activity, use india_sectoral_check. Stateless lookup: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• india_sectoral_checkFree

  Before you process personal data under Indian law, find out which sectoral regulators actually bind your specific activity (RBI / SEBI / IRDAI / TRAI / DoT / PFRDA) from its processing profile, so you know whose rules apply before you act. This analyses your processing to say what applies; for a plain directory of every Indian regulator regardless of your activity, use india_regulators_directory.

• japan_cross_border_statusFree

  Before you transfer personal data out of Japan, check the destination country's APPI Art 28 status (adequacy / standard basis / high scrutiny). Pass the ISO-3166 alpha-2 country code. Stateless lookup: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• pan_classifyFree

  Classify a PAN entity type from the 4th character (P=Person, C=Company, H=HUF, F=Firm, ...). Stateless validator: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• pii_testFree

  Dry-run VITNA's PII / threat detection on a sample event before you send real data, to preview what would be tagged, how it would be redacted, and whether severity would escalate. Nothing is persisted and nothing is filtered: a safe rehearsal you act on, not an enforced gate — it records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• privacy_notice_getFree

  Generate the operator's jurisdiction-templated privacy notice. Returns markdown or JSON. Called with an API key, the operator's name and contact details appear as placeholders; the signed-in owner gets the real values. Stateless generator: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• sin_validateFree

  Validate a Canadian SIN (Luhn checksum); returns series region + masked form. Stateless validator: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• sub_processors_registerFree

  Return the public sub-processor register (Supabase, Vercel, Resend, etc.). Stateless lookup: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• us_sectoral_checkFree

  Before you process personal data under US law, find out which US federal sectoral regimes bind you (HIPAA, GLBA, COPPA, FERPA, FCRA, SOX) for a given processing profile, so you can factor them in before you act. US-scoped; for Indian sectoral regulators use india_sectoral_check.

• us_state_breach_deadlineFree

  Quick reference lookup of a single US state's breach-notification window, AG recipient and resident threshold (e.g. 'CA' gives 500 residents, CA AG, without unreasonable delay). This is a static table, not an incident ruling. When you have the actual incident facts and need a reportable / not-reportable decision with reasoning, use breach_classify instead. Stateless lookup: records no decision and leaves no dashboard timeline trace.

• vitna_claimFree

  Ask whether this VITNA account has been claimed by a real person yet. Call this when the user asks about their VITNA account or when you are told evidence is not being kept. Returns { claimed, claim_url: null, claim_note, what_claiming_gets_you }. You are never given the claim link, and you must not look for it: only a person may claim the account that oversees you. If claimed is false, tell the user that the account's evidence is NOT being durably recorded and that they can claim it with the claim link VITNA showed them when the trial started (the stdio server prints it in its MCP server log).

• vitna_helpFree

  What is VITNA and how do I use it to keep myself in check? Call this FIRST after connecting to learn the safety and oversight checks available: how to check risky actions BEFORE running them, what a deny / hold decision means, trial vs claimed mode, and how the user can monitor and audit what you do. Runs entirely locally: no account, no API call, and no dashboard timeline trace.

• vitna_preflightFree

  SAFETY / OVERSIGHT CHECK before a dangerous or destructive action (shell command, file deletion, DB statement, network call). Call this to have VITNA check the action BEFORE you run it: it flags dangerous shell / SQL / secret-exfil / prompt-injection / suspicious-network patterns and returns { decision: allowed|blocked|flagged }. RESPONSE SHAPE DEPENDS ON THE KEY: an unclaimed trial key gets the decision label only, because the pattern detail is what makes the classifier worth stealing. A claimed key additionally gets threat_category, severity, reason (the rule names that matched, never the matched text), a threats[] array and a redacted echo of what was scanned, plus a signed audit record the user can review. VITNA evaluates and records; it does NOT enforce, so treat blocked / flagged as a stop and get human approval. Act on decision: when the account's owner has switched it to shadow mode, decision is allowed even where flagged is true, and shadow.would_have says what VITNA would have answered when enforcing. This is how a user keeps you in check. Heuristic pattern match, not a sandbox: novel or obfuscated payloads can pass.

• Code scan13 source files scanned25/25
• Live reliabilityremote reachable in 1179ms20/20
• Tool poisoning23 tool descriptions checked15/15
• Auth qualityAPI key sent as a header8/15
• Maintenancelast push 19 days ago15/15
• Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner; website matches verified namespace8/10

Safety score

91/100

higher than 85% of 48,255 servers

Tools

23

the typical server has 7

Tools that change things

0%

typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break

Uptime

100%

of our recent checks; the typical remote server answers 100%

Response time

326 ms

faster than 44% of 30,031 servers

Downloads a week

120

more than 67% of 12,191 servers with a package

VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents: common questions

Is VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents MCP server safe?

Yes, by our scan: it is graded A (91/100). Read the VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents safety report

How do I install VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents?

It runs remotely at vitna.costrinity.xyz. Add it to Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code or Claude Desktop with the snippets above, or call it through the mcp.market gateway without installing anything.

Does VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents need an API key?

Yes. The registry entry asks for VITNA_API_KEY, Authorization.

Is VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents maintained?

The last commit was 20 days ago (2026-10-14). The latest release is v0.5.6.

Is VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents up?

100% of our last 28 checks got an answer. We check remote servers about four times a day.

What can I use instead of VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents?

Servers from other publishers that do the same job: Harness MCP server.

How does VITNA – Containment for rogue AI agents compare with other MCP servers?

safety score 91/100 (higher than 85% of 48,255 servers); tools 23 (the typical server has 7); tools that change things 0% (typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break). Full comparison.