Commercial work informed by
VaHive Systems Lab
No. It is commercial work informed by VaHive Systems Lab, carrying research into an architecture, open-source tools, and advisory work. Sentinel is open source and finished. Magus Local and Magus Agent API are fully specified governance architectures with no public implementation yet, and the pages say so.
One governance architecture, specified across two deployment pathways, because where the model runs changes what can be enforced. Magus Local is for a model running on your own hardware; Magus Agent API is for a model accessed as a remote service. Both are fully specified across eight documents each, both are unimplemented, and both pages say so.
A tool that records what a published npm MCP server declares — its artifact digest, file inventory, dependencies, install scripts and entrypoints — and tells you what changed when a new version ships. It reads the exact artifact without running any of it. The same repository includes Watch, a self-hosted monitor that polls the packages you choose and raises a reviewable notice.
One command, no account and no signup: npx magus-mcpsentinel analyze npm <package>@<version> --evidence-dir ./evidence. It prints a schema-valid report and keeps the registry metadata and the exact artifact it read. Nothing from the package under analysis is installed, and nothing in it runs.
Yes, permanently. The analyzer, the CLI, the diff engine and the Watch monitor are all in the public repository under Apache-2.0. There is no withheld tier and nothing held back to sell later. Use is governed by the licence and notices in the repository.
No, and it will not pretend to. It produces evidence about what an artifact declares; you set the policy. Deciding whether a change is acceptable needs to know what the package is for, and that is knowledge you have and a tool does not.
Artifact digest, file inventory, dependencies, install scripts and entrypoints are recorded completely, on every package, every time. If something you approved has moved, you will know. Reading the tool surface out of compiled JavaScript is inference and is published as a lower bound: across a pinned corpus of 50 real published MCP servers, 37 yield a usable tool inventory and only 12 can be resolved completely. Both numbers are stated because only the second permits the conclusion that a tool was removed.
None of the three. Sentinel reads public npm artifacts by name and version — it never accepts credentials, never opens an MCP session, and never inspects live traffic. Watch is single-tenant: you deploy it, you hold the data, and nothing passes through us. The only thing any hosted version would need to know is which public packages you care about.
Our own instance, running against public MCP packages we do not control, published as it stands rather than curated. Every change it has recorded is there with the evidence behind it, including the releases where extraction was incomplete and it says so. It is the same code as the repository, and it is the honest version of a demo.
Yes. Advisory work is scoped around governance and drift audits, adversarial issues registers, and agent-system architecture, none of which require running anything of ours. Assessment limits are stated before an engagement starts.
No. They are preprints describing proposed frameworks and architectures, published with their own open issues. They should be read as research, not as certification or as evidence that something is deployed.
Anything not answered here: Pricing covers what is free and what is not, Watch shows the tool working on packages we do not control, and the repository documentation is the operational source of truth for both. For anything else, get in touch.