Skip to main content
Comparison Guide

HackMyAgent vs Manual Security Audit

Manual MCP security audits take hours and miss configuration gaps. HackMyAgent runs 310 static checks in seconds, catches what humans skip, and provides auto-remediation with rollback.

HackMyAgent

by OpenA2A

Automated security toolkit for AI agents. 310 static checks across 69categories including credential exposure, prompt injection, MCP server misconfigurations, and supply chain risks. Runs in seconds with auto-remediation and rollback.

Open Source310 static checksAuto-Remediation

Manual Security Audit

Human-led review

A security engineer manually reviews configurations, code, and dependencies for vulnerabilities. Thoroughness depends on the reviewer's knowledge of AI-specific attack vectors, which is a new and rapidly evolving domain.

Point-in-TimeReviewer-DependentPriced per engagement

Key Distinction: Encoded Attack Patterns vs Reviewer Knowledge

Manual audits depend on the reviewer knowing every attack vector. AI agent security is a new field. Most security engineers haven't encountered MCP server poisoning, prompt injection via tool descriptions, or Claude Code hook exploitation. HackMyAgent encodes these attack patterns into automated checks.

Feature Comparison

FeatureHackMyAgentManual Audit
Time to complete SecondsHours to days
Security checks 310 static across 69 categories, plus 29 NanoMind semanticDepends on reviewer
Attack payloads 164 built-in across 16 categoriesRequires custom scripts
Credential scanning AutomatedManual file review
MCP server security Dedicated checksOften overlooked
Prompt injection testing Static checks plus attack modeRarely tested
Claude Code configuration Dedicated checksRequires deep knowledge
Supply chain / dependencies Automated (DEP category)npm audit + manual review
Network security Dedicated checksVaries
Auto-remediation With rollbackManual fixes
OASB benchmark mapping Built-in complianceNo standard benchmark
CVE detection AutomatedDepends on tooling
Repeatable Every commit / CIPoint-in-time
Output formats Text, JSON, SARIF, HTMLPDF report (custom)
Cost Free (Apache-2.0)$5K – $50K per engagement

Typical published list-price range; verify with the vendor.

When to Choose Each Approach

Choose HackMyAgent if you...

  • Need consistent, repeatable security checks
  • Run AI agents with MCP servers
  • Want to test in CI/CD pipelines on every commit
  • Need attack mode to simulate real adversaries
  • Want auto-remediation with safe rollback
  • Need OASB benchmark compliance reports
  • Want JSON/SARIF output for SIEM integration

Choose Manual Audit if you...

  • Need business logic review specific to your application
  • Want a human threat model of your unique architecture
  • Need compliance documentation for a specific framework
  • Want penetration testing beyond automated checks
  • Your organization requires a named auditor's signature
  • Need to assess organizational security processes
  • You want both: use HackMyAgent first, then manual audit for gaps

Time to Complete a Full Security Scan

< 30 seconds

with HackMyAgent

npx hackmyagent secure → 310 static checks → report

2–5 days

with Manual Audit

Scoping, review, testing, report writing, delivery

Automated vs Manual: Side by Side

One command covers 310 static checks and 29 NanoMind semantic checks. Manual checklists cover what the reviewer remembers.

HackMyAgent: Automated Scan

$ npx hackmyagent@0.32.0 secure --ci

Scanning ./fake-vulnerable-agent...

  fake-vulnerable-agent  v1.0.0 · openclaw · 30 files analyzed
  36 critical issues found

  Security  ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 0/100

  Checks      310 static declared · 61 of 61 check groups ran · 3 unreachable
              · 30 semantic (NanoMind AST, 0-7 of 7 analyzer families)
              · 36 files read by static checks
  Categories  credentials (7 critical) · MCP (2 critical) · network (2 critical)
              · prompt (21 high) · sandbox (2 high) · capabilities (1 critical)
              · supply-chain (1 critical) · governance (1 high) · skill (19 critical)
              · identity (1 high) · A2A (1 high) · LLM risk (1 critical)
              · heartbeat (1 critical) · config (1 high) · auth (1 critical)
              · git hygiene (1 critical) · 9 others clear
  Verdict     Not safe to ship. .env Not Ignored in .env + 114 more.

  36 critical  50 high  28 medium  1 low

  │ CRITICAL  .env Not Ignored
  │ .env
  │ →  hackmyagent secure --fix

Excerpt of a run against an intentionally vulnerable test fixture, captured 2026-08-25. The findings and their counts belong to that fixture.

Manual Audit: Checklist

# Manual MCP Security Audit Checklist
# Time estimate: 2-5 days

[ ] Review all .env files for exposed credentials
[ ] Check MCP server configurations
[ ] Test each tool description for injection vectors
[ ] Audit Claude Code settings.json
[ ] Review network egress rules
[ ] Check dependency versions for CVEs
[ ] Test prompt injection resistance
[ ] Verify sandbox configuration
[ ] Review file permission model
[ ] Check authentication mechanisms
[ ] Audit logging configuration
[ ] Test session management
[ ] Review rate limiting
[ ] Check API security headers
# ...more items, as many as the reviewer remembers

# Common gaps in manual audits:
# - MCP tool description injection (new attack vector)
# - Claude Code hook exploitation
# - Gateway credential exposure
# - Missing OASB benchmark mapping

Scan your project

310 static checks. 29 NanoMind semantic checks. 164 attack payloads. Auto-remediation with rollback. Open source, Apache-2.0.

Apache-2.0 license. Scans Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code, and any MCP server