ESET PROTECT vs GhidraMCP

In-depth architectural comparison of the ESET PROTECT and GhidraMCP MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

E

Choose ESET PROTECT when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore ESET PROTECT Details

Choose GhidraMCP when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
• You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
• Primary tools included: Ghidra plugin with MCP bridge, Binary decompilation and analysis, Method and data renaming.

Explore GhidraMCP Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	E ESET PROTECT Security	GhidraMCP LaurieWired Security
Summary	MCP server for ESET PROTECT's ESET Connect API - device, EDR, vulnerability, patch, and user data.	A Model Context Protocol server for Ghidra that enables LLMs to autonomously reverse engineer applications. Provides tools for decompiling binaries, renaming methods and data, and listing methods, classes, imports, and exports.
Category & Scope	Security

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "eset-protect": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "eset-protect"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "lauriewired-ghidramcp": {
      "url": "http://127.0.0.1:8081/sse"
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons