container-manager-mcp
PyPI
v2.3.0
Published by an unidentified publisher — no publish provenance and no public repository, so the publisher could not be verified and the source cannot be independently located.
Container Manager - manage Docker, Docker Swarm, and Podman containers. MCP+A2A Servers Out of the Box!
The grade answers one question — how safe is this server for you to adopt — so it is computed in two auditable stages. Nothing below is an opinion or an LLM's guess; every line is a real term the deterministic engine applied, and the same input always yields the same number.
1. Threat score — 100 − 0 = 100. What the published surface and source actually contain:
The deterministic scan raised no scored threat in the surface it inspected — the threat score stayed at 100. Capability observations and advisory notes are recorded but never lower it.
2. Client adoption risk — 100 − 8 = 92. Three small, subtract-only factors that reflect your risk in adopting it — a clean scan proves less on a powerful, unverified or barely-inspectable package, so the grade says so plainly:
| Points | Adoption-risk factor |
|---|---|
| −6 | capability blast radius (high) — client exposure if the model is manipulated |
| −2 | publisher verification (unlinked) — no provenance/repo link, but the shipped source was fully read |
Capability observations and info notes are shown under Findings but never scored.
Open any row's finding below for the file, line and evidence behind a deduction.
In the server's implementation (`container_manager_mcp/container_manager.py:1048`): Spawning a shell/process is command-execution capability; with unsanitized tool input it is command injection / RCE. This is read from the code itself — not from the tool description — so a poisoned server cannot hide it behind honest-looking metadata.
Evidence: ") result = subprocess.run(cmd, capture_output=True, text=True) if result.returncode != 0:
Fix: Review this call path: confirm it never receives unsanitized tool input, constrain it, or remove it. Treat a server whose code reaches these sinks as high-capability regardless of what its tools claim.
Location: server container_manager_mcp/container_manager.py
In the server's implementation (`container_manager_mcp/k8s/compose.py:16`): Spawning a shell/process is command-execution capability; with unsanitized tool input it is command injection / RCE. This is read from the code itself — not from the tool description — so a poisoned server cannot hide it behind honest-looking metadata.
Evidence: convert = subprocess.run( ["kompose", "convert", "-f", compose_file, "-o", out],
Fix: Review this call path: confirm it never receives unsanitized tool input, constrain it, or remove it. Treat a server whose code reaches these sinks as high-capability regardless of what its tools claim.
Location: server container_manager_mcp/k8s/compose.py
In the server's implementation (`container_manager_mcp/k8s/workloads.py:1172`): Spawning a shell/process is command-execution capability; with unsanitized tool input it is command injection / RCE. This is read from the code itself — not from the tool description — so a poisoned server cannot hide it behind honest-looking metadata.
Evidence: context] proc = subprocess.run(cmd, capture_output=True) # nosec B603 B607 if proc.returncode != 0:
Fix: Review this call path: confirm it never receives unsanitized tool input, constrain it, or remove it. Treat a server whose code reaches these sinks as high-capability regardless of what its tools claim.
Location: server container_manager_mcp/k8s/workloads.py
In a packaging/dev/install script (shipped, but not the server runtime) (`scripts/security_sanitizer.py:136`): Spawning a shell/process is command-execution capability; with unsanitized tool input it is command injection / RCE. This is read from the code itself — not from the tool description — so a poisoned server cannot hide it behind honest-looking metadata.
Evidence: try: result = subprocess.run( ["git", "ls-files", "--cached", "--others", "--exclude-standard"],
Fix: Review this call path: confirm it never receives unsanitized tool input, constrain it, or remove it. Treat a server whose code reaches these sinks as high-capability regardless of what its tools claim.
Location: server scripts/security_sanitizer.py
In a packaging/dev/install script (shipped, but not the server runtime) (`tests/test_integration.py:35`): Spawning a shell/process is command-execution capability; with unsanitized tool input it is command injection / RCE. This is read from the code itself — not from the tool description — so a poisoned server cannot hide it behind honest-looking metadata.
Evidence: try: result = subprocess.run( ["docker", "info"], capture_output=True, tex
Fix: Review this call path: confirm it never receives unsanitized tool input, constrain it, or remove it. Treat a server whose code reaches these sinks as high-capability regardless of what its tools claim.
Location: server tests/test_integration.py
Each tool and what it can reach — statically extracted from the published source.
cm_compose_operationsno sensitive capabilitycm_container_operationsno sensitive capabilitycm_docker_swarmno sensitive capabilitycm_doctorno sensitive capabilitycm_image_operationsno sensitive capabilitycm_info_operationsno sensitive capabilitycm_ingest_inventoryno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_clusterno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_configno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_governanceno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_networkingno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_observabilityno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_rbacno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_storageno sensitive capabilitycm_k8s_workloadsno sensitive capabilitycm_list_hostsno sensitive capabilitycm_multi_contextno sensitive capabilitycm_network_operationsno sensitive capabilitycm_podmanno sensitive capabilitycm_swarm_operationsno sensitive capabilitycm_system_operationsno sensitive capabilitycm_volume_operationsno sensitive capabilitydeploy_specialist_containerno sensitive capabilityget_specialist_statusno sensitive capabilitylist_specialist_containersno sensitive capabilitystop_specialist_containerno sensitive capabilitytrace_port_namespaceno sensitive capabilityScan history per published version. The engine is deterministic — the same version always yields the same score, so a changed score means the package itself changed.
| Version | Score | Findings | Engine | Scanned |
|---|---|---|---|---|
v2.3.0 latest |
A 92/100 | 5 | 1.13.0 | 2026-08-25 |
Show this server's live Trust Score in your README, docs or website. The badge is served straight from the registry and updates automatically after every rescan — no API key needed. It links back to this page, so anyone who sees the grade can also read the findings behind it instead of taking a number on faith.
The score above is reproducible: the same package version always yields the same result. Run it locally or over the free API — no account, no LLM, fully deterministic.
npx mcptrustchecker scan container-manager-mcp --online --registry pypi
Operator control CLI for AdGuard Home with an MCP adapter
interacting with Aliyun (Alibaba Cloud) services through This MCP server provides tools.
MCP server for the Aspro.Cloud REST API
MCP server for Atlassian Confluence and Jira Cloud APIs
AuroraCloud-first MCP server that exposes AuroraDocs workspace data to Claude Desktop and other AI agents
The official AWS Knowledge Base retrieval server using Bedrock Agent Runtime.