Impersonation: io.github.jimmybr-PDX/rugradar copies an existing product's name and description (RugRadar)
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 8/100
- Issue type
- Bug
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Active
- Domain
- backend
Research direction
This is a moderation and impersonation dispute about a published listing, not a code change, and the payload names no files, tests or entry points. A newcomer cannot finish it by editing the repository. It needs a registry maintainer to review the listing and decide on removal under the project's dispute process. Done means a maintainer has ruled on the report, not that a patch has merged.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Impersonation report
Hi team, I need to report a listing that appears to impersonate an existing product published in this registry.
Our product (prior use):
- RugRadar, a free token-safety / honeypot checker, live at https://rugradar-dun.vercel.app
- Publicly launched 12 Oct 2026 (launch post: https://x.com/The_Real_EJC/status/2109675509726450112)
- Registered in this registry since 6 Oct 2026 as
io.github.Darkjay123/rugradarv1.0.0 (we marked that version deleted today while consolidating into an ownership-verified domain namespace; publish timestamp visible in registry history) - Canonical entry now:
app.vercel.rugradar-dun/rugradar-mcp(status: active, ownership verified via the HTTP challenge on rugradar-dun.vercel.app)
The listing at issue:
io.github.jimmybr-PDX/rugradar, published 14 Oct 2026 05:00 UTC, status active- Title: "RugRadar"
- Description: "Rug-pull, token-safety and honeypot risk checks for Solana and EVM tokens. $0.01 per call."
- Website: https://x402-seller-pmlm.onrender.com/rugradar
- Repository: https://github.com/jimmybr-PDX/x402-seller
- Remote: https://x402-seller-pmlm.onrender.com/mcp (header
X-RugRadar-Key, prepaid credit)
Why we believe this is impersonation: the name ("RugRadar"), title, and product description ("rug-pull, token-safety and honeypot risk checks") closely mirror our product and wording, and the listing was published after both our 6 Oct registry registration and our 12 Oct public launch, pointing at an unrelated endpoint and repository, and monetizing per call. To anyone (or any agent) browsing the registry, this entry reads as our product. It is not.
Request: could the maintainers review io.github.jimmybr-PDX/rugradar for impersonation and remove it, or advise the correct process for this kind of dispute? Happy to provide any additional evidence (launch archives, registry history timestamps).
Thanks.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 7.3k
- Forks
- 1k
- Avg merge
- 3d 21h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 14
Getting set up
- Ships a Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
- No pull request template
- Read the contributing guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from modelcontextprotocol/registry
-
3 registry records that cannot resolve for any client, and a caution about single-pass dead countsOpen
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
modelcontextprotocol/registry#1692 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 80/100
modelcontextprotocol/registry#1657 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 68/100
modelcontextprotocol/registry#1652 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
-
IsValidRemoteURL only blocks literal localhost/127.0.0.1 — misses [::1], 127.0.0.0/8, 0.0.0.0, and private/link-local addressesPossibly taken @amitvijapur claimed this 86 days ago. Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
modelcontextprotocol/registry#1465 · 1 comment ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
-
GitLab repository URLs with nested groups/subgroups are rejected by validatorPossibly taken @anneheartrecord claimed this 125 days ago. Open
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 84/100
modelcontextprotocol/registry#1359 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 2 days
All issues in modelcontextprotocol/registry
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
QuantumNous/new-api#7839 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
bug needs-triage service/costoptimizationhub
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 72/100
hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws#50507 · 1 comment ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
adcontextprotocol/adcp-go#567 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
bug raised-by:desk
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
medici-finance/assay#3097 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 62/100
supabase-community/supabase-kubernetes#275 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day