Feranor Resilience vs Kastell — MCP Server Comparison | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Feranor Resilience vs Kastell
In-depth architectural comparison of the Feranor Resilience and Kastell 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.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Feranor Resilience
Security · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 69/100 (Great) | Auth: No auth required
Kastell
Security · Local stdio
Quality: 63/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Feranor Resilience if you need specialized Security tools running via a hosted cloud SSE transport. Choose Kastell if your workspace requires Security integration with local subprocess execution. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose Feranor Resilience when:
You need dedicated capabilities in the Security domain.
You prefer remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Freemium).
Primary tools included: Invisible Unicode and homoglyph detection, Text cleanup with before-and-after risk comparison, Domain scores across TLS, DNS, headers, and speed.
Scan/purge hidden text & score web domains: TLS, DNS, headers, speed. Free scans, $0.01 actions.The Tools:
text_scan_v1 — free
Scans a text string for invisible Unicode characters, homoglyphs, and normalization issues. Returns a risk score, a list of flagged characters, and detected homoglyphs. Never modifies the input text.
text_purge_v1 — $0.01 per call
Removes invisible Unicode characters and replaces homoglyphs in a text string, then normalizes the result. Returns the cleaned text plus a before-and-after risk comparison.
domain_check_score_v1 — free
Overall score, per-category scores, and how many findings each category raised. Use it to triage: rank a list of domains, confirm one is healthy, or decide whether the full report is worth pulling. It tells you which categories are weak and how many issues they hold, but not what the issues are.
domain_check_score_batch_v1 — free
The same triage scores for up to 100 domains in a single call. One score summary per distinct domain: overall score, per-category scores, and how many findings each category raised. Never the findings themselves.
domain_check_v1 — $0.01 per call
Full report for one domain: weighted score out of 100, per-category breakdown, and every individual finding with a prioritised remediation order.
domain_check_batch_v1 — from $0.005 per domain
The same full report for up to 100 domains in a single call, with one payment for the whole batch instead of one per domain. Both cheaper per domain and much faster than calling domain_check_v1 in a loop.
Tools & Capabilities Breakdown
Feranor Resilience Tools (5)
Invisible Unicode and homoglyph detection
Text cleanup with before-and-after risk comparison
Domain scores across TLS, DNS, headers, and speed
Single-domain detailed findings with remediation priority
Batch scoring and reporting for up to 100 domains
Kastell Tools (6)
Server security audits with remediation
SSH hardening and fail2ban setup
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).
Feranor Resilience is categorized under Security and uses a remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport. In contrast, Kastell belongs to Security using local stdio subprocess. Select Feranor Resilience when you need capabilities focused on security and Kastell when you require tools for security.
