mcpField
M
memory-poisoning-scanner

memory-poisoning-scanner

Local
github.com/GuardBeeSecurity1Updated 1d ago

About memory-poisoning-scanner

memory-poisoning-scanner is an MCP server for developers checking agent code for persistent-memory poisoning risks. It detects patterns where untrusted input enters long-term memory or retrieved memory is used as trusted instructions.

Key features

  1. 01Detects unsafe persistent-memory writes
  2. 02Checks memory readback into trusted roles
  3. 03Covers vector stores and MemGPT patterns
  4. 04Exports SARIF 2.1.0 findings
  5. 05Supports guardbee.yml configuration

Use cases

  1. 01Reviewing agent memory code
  2. 02Checking vector-store ingestion paths
  3. 03Adding scans to CI/CD

MCP support

It provides scan_text, scan_file, scan_directory, and list_patterns tools to MCP clients for scanning agent code.

Configuration

Local server config is the same for every client. Copy it into your client’s MCP config file.

mcp.json · Universal config
{
"mcpServers": {
"4hmetuyar-memory-poisoning-scanner": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@guardbee/mcp-memory-poisoning-scanner"
]
}
}
}
Run commandnpx -y @guardbee/mcp-memory-poisoning-scanner

Local servers need a runtime on your machine (e.g. Node.js 18+). Config file locations differ by client; see your client’s docs.

Packages
npm@guardbee/mcp-memory-poisoning-scanner0.1.2

Tools

4

Saved tool list · updated 2w ago

ParameterTypeRequiredDescription
labelstringNoOptional label shown in findings (e.g. filename)
contentstringYesThe code content to scan

Details

From the project README

@guardbee/mcp-memory-poisoning-scanner

🇬🇧 English | 🇹🇷 Türkçe | 🇨🇳 中文 | 🇯🇵 日本語 | 🇰🇷 한국어 | 🇧🇷 Português | 🇪🇸 Español | 🇩🇪 Deutsch

npm version npm downloads License: MIT

An MCP (Model Context Protocol) server that scans agent code for memory poisoning — untrusted input written into an agent's persistent, cross-session memory that later gets recalled and fed back to the model as trusted context, potentially in a completely unrelated future session.

prompt-injection-scanner catches an injection payload sitting in content the model reads once (a document, a scraped page). This package catches something structurally different: the code pattern that lets an injection payload become part of what the model treats as its own long-term knowledge — the same gap between reflected and stored XSS, applied to an agent's memory instead of a browser's DOM.

Telemetry is off by default. With GUARDBEE_TELEMETRY=1 it sends the server, tool, success, duration and short parameter values such as a file path; longer strings and fields like content, token or password are replaced with a placeholder. See @guardbee/mcp-telemetry.

Claude ──► memory-poisoning-scanner ──► Your agent's source
              │
              ├─ memory-write     (untrusted input persisted into archival/core memory or a vector KB)
              └─ memory-readback  (recalled memory fed into a system/assistant-role message or prompt)

Why ordinary conversation memory is out of scope

A ConversationBufferMemory holding raw chat turns, or a plain chatHistory.push({role: "user", content: userInput}), is completely normal — that's just conversation history, not a vulnerability. This package deliberately does not flag that.

What it targets is narrower and higher-stakes: writes to persistent memory that outlives the current conversation — MemGPT-style archival memory (recalled across future, unrelated sessions) and core memory (re-injected into the system prompt on every turn by design), or a vector store used as a long-term knowledge base rather than per-conversation RAG context. If untrusted input lands there unsanitized, it doesn't just influence the current exchange — it becomes part of what the agent believes is true, for anyone, indefinitely, until someone happens to notice.

The second half of the risk is symmetric: a memory/vector retrieval result flowing directly into a system/assistant-role message or a prompt template is where a poisoned memory "cashes out" as an instruction the model obeys rather than data it merely reads.


Features

  • 5 memory-write patterns: MemGPT archival_memory_insert/core_memory_append/core_memory_replace fed raw input, vector store add_texts/add_documents/upsert fed raw input, and a generic catch-all for custom-named long-term-memory/knowledge-base stores
  • 3 memory-readback patterns: archival/vector retrieval results flowing into a system/assistant-role message, or interpolated directly into a prompt template
  • SARIF 2.1.0 output — CI/CD integration (GitHub Code Scanning, etc.)
  • Config file support via guardbee.yml
  • 17 unit tests — a positive and a negative (false-positive) scenario for every pattern, including an explicit check that ordinary conversation-buffer usage produces zero findings. End-to-end verified against a realistic planted-vulnerability fixture (caught both the write and the read-back) and the entire guardbee-mcp monorepo (386 files, zero false positives in production code)

Quick Start

Claude Desktop / MCP Client
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "guardbee-memory-poisoning-scanner": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@guardbee/mcp-memory-poisoning-scanner"]
    }
  }
}
CLI (CI/CD)
npx @guardbee/mcp-memory-poisoning-scanner scan ./src --fail-on=high --format=sarif > results.sarif

MCP Tools

ToolDescription
scan_textScans a code snippet
scan_fileScans a single file
scan_directoryRecursively scans a directory
list_patternsLists all supported patterns by category

Detected Patterns

CategoryPatternSeverity
memory-writearchival_memory_insert_raw_inputcritical
memory-writecore_memory_write_raw_input (append/replace)critical
memory-writevector_store_add_raw_inputhigh
memory-writegeneric_named_memory_write_raw_inputmedium
memory-readbackarchival_memory_feeds_trusted_rolecritical
memory-readbackvector_retrieval_feeds_trusted_rolehigh
memory-readbackmemory_retrieval_feeds_prompt_templatehigh

Configuration (guardbee.yml)

memory-poisoning-scanner:
  fail-on: high       # any | critical | high | medium | none
  max-files: 5000
  exclude:
    - ".test.ts"

Limitations (by design)

  • Heuristic, not taint tracking. The write and read-back checks each look at one bounded location, not a proven data-flow path from a specific write to a specific later read. A finding means the shape of the risk is present in the code, not a mathematically confirmed exploit chain.
  • Pattern coverage is MemGPT-terminology and generic-JS-naming based. A custom-built long-term memory system using entirely different function/variable names won't be recognized unless it happens to match the generic patterns (*memory*/*knowledge_base* naming, or a vectorstore-style API).
  • This finds code patterns that enable memory poisoning, not an actual poisoned memory store at runtime — pair it with prompt-injection-scanner (for scanning what's actually stored) if you can inspect the memory contents directly.

Development

npm run build
npm test             # 17 unit tests

License

MIT — GuardBee

Feedback

Questions, ideas, or a false positive? Start a thread in GitHub Discussions or open an issue. If GuardBee is useful to you, a ⭐ on the repository helps others find it.

Comments

Markdown supported

New to MCP?

From what the protocol is to installing your first server, these answers cover most first questions.

An open protocol that defines how AI applications connect to external tools and data in a uniform way. Clients talk to the model; MCP servers provide tools, resources and prompt templates. They exchange standard messages, so one server can be reused by many clients.