Is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp Safe?
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp — Nerq Trust Score 56.6/100 (D grade). Score based on 5 independent trust signals.
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is a software tool with a Nerq Trust Score of 56.6/100 (D), based on 5 independent data dimensions. Security: 0/100. Maintenance: 1/100. Popularity: 0/100. Data sourced from multiple public sources including package registries, GitHub, NVD, OSV.dev, and OpenSSF Scorecard. Last updated: n/a. Machine-readable data (JSON).
Is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp safe?
Trust Score Breakdown — Obsidian Filesystem Mcp has a Nerq Trust Score of 56.6/100 (D). Measured across 5 independent trust signals.
What is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's trust score?
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp has a Nerq Trust Score of 56.6/100, earning a D grade. This score is based on 5 independently measured dimensions including security, maintenance, and community adoption.
What are the key security findings for Obsidian Filesystem Mcp?
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's strongest signal is compliance at 100/100. No known vulnerabilities have been detected.
What is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp and who maintains it?
| Author | natesena |
| Category | Devops |
| Source | https://github.com/natesena/obsidian-filesystem-mcp |
| Frameworks | anthropic |
| Protocols | mcp |
Regulatory Compliance
| EU AI Act Risk Class | MINIMAL |
| Compliance Score | 100/100 |
| Jurisdictions | Assessed across 52 jurisdictions |
Popular Alternatives in devops
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp Across Platforms
Same developer/company in other registries:
What Is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp?
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is a DevOps tool: Docker-based MCP server for Obsidian vault access.. Nerq Trust Score: 57/100 (D).
Nerq independently analyzes every software tool, app, and extension across multiple trust signals including security vulnerabilities, maintenance activity, license compliance, and community adoption.
How Nerq Assesses Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's Safety
Nerq's Trust Score is calculated from 13+ independent signals aggregated into five dimensions. Here is how Obsidian Filesystem Mcp performs in each:
- Security (0/100): Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's security posture is poor. This score factors in known CVEs, dependency vulnerabilities, security policy presence, and code signing practices.
- Maintenance (1/100): Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is potentially abandoned. We track commit frequency, release cadence, issue response times, and PR merge rates.
- Documentation (1/100): Documentation quality is insufficient. This includes README completeness, API documentation, usage examples, and contribution guidelines.
- Compliance (100/100): Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is broadly compliant. Assessed against regulations in 52 jurisdictions including the EU AI Act, CCPA, and GDPR.
- Community (0/100): Community adoption is limited. Based on GitHub stars, forks, download counts, and ecosystem integrations.
The overall Trust Score of 56.6/100 (D) is the weighted combination of these measured signals. It is a measurement, not a pass/fail or suitability judgment — weigh the individual signals against your own requirements.
Who Typically Evaluates Obsidian Filesystem Mcp?
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is commonly evaluated by:
- Developers and teams working with devops tools
- Organizations evaluating AI tools for their stack
- Researchers exploring AI capabilities in this domain
How to read the signals: Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's measured signals (security 0/100, maintenance 1/100, documentation 1/100, community 0/100) are shown above. These are measurements, not a suitability judgment — weigh each signal against the requirements of your own use case and risk tolerance.
How to Verify Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's Safety Yourself
While Nerq provides automated trust analysis, we recommend these additional steps before adopting any software tool:
- Check the source code — Review the repository's security policy, open issues, and recent commits for signs of active maintenance.
- Scan dependencies — Use tools like
npm audit,pip-audit, orsnykto check for known vulnerabilities in Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's dependency tree. - Review permissions — Understand what access Obsidian Filesystem Mcp requires. Software tools should follow the principle of least privilege.
- Test in isolation — Run Obsidian Filesystem Mcp in a sandboxed environment before granting access to production data or systems.
- Monitor continuously — Use Nerq's API to set up automated trust checks:
GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=obsidian-filesystem-mcp - Review the license — Confirm that Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's license is compatible with your intended use case. Pay attention to restrictions on commercial use, redistribution, and derivative works. Some AI tools use dual licensing or have separate terms for enterprise customers that differ from the open-source license.
- Check community signals — Look at the project's issue tracker, discussion forums, and social media presence. A healthy community actively reports bugs, contributes fixes, and discusses security concerns openly. Low community engagement may indicate limited peer review of the codebase.
Common Safety Concerns with Obsidian Filesystem Mcp
When evaluating whether Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is safe, consider these category-specific risks:
Understand how Obsidian Filesystem Mcp processes, stores, and transmits your data. Review the tool's privacy policy and data retention practices, especially for sensitive or proprietary information.
Check Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's dependency tree for known vulnerabilities. Tools with outdated or unmaintained dependencies pose a higher security risk.
Regularly check for updates to Obsidian Filesystem Mcp. Security patches and bug fixes are only effective if you're running the latest version.
If Obsidian Filesystem Mcp connects to external APIs or services, each integration point is a potential attack surface. Audit all third-party connections, verify that data shared with external services is minimized, and ensure that integration credentials are rotated regularly.
Verify that Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's license is compatible with your intended use case. Some AI tools have restrictive licenses that limit commercial use, redistribution, or derivative works. Using Obsidian Filesystem Mcp in violation of its license can expose your organization to legal liability.
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp and the EU AI Act
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is classified as Minimal Risk under the EU AI Act. This is the lowest risk category, meaning it faces minimal regulatory requirements. However, transparency obligations still apply.
Nerq's compliance assessment covers 52 jurisdictions worldwide. For organizations deploying AI tools in regulated environments, understanding these classifications is essential for legal compliance.
Best Practices for Using Obsidian Filesystem Mcp Safely
Whether you're an individual developer or an enterprise team, these practices will help you get the most from Obsidian Filesystem Mcp while minimizing risk:
Periodically review how Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is used in your workflow. Check for unexpected behavior, permissions drift, and compliance with your security policies.
Ensure Obsidian Filesystem Mcp and all its dependencies are running the latest stable versions to benefit from security patches.
Grant Obsidian Filesystem Mcp only the minimum permissions it needs to function. Avoid granting admin or root access.
Subscribe to Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's security advisories and vulnerability disclosures. Use Nerq's API to get automated trust score updates.
Create and maintain a clear policy for how Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is used within your organization, including data handling guidelines and acceptable use cases.
Situations That Warrant Independent Review of Obsidian Filesystem Mcp
Nerq's signals are one input. In the following situations, evaluate Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's measured signals against your own requirements before making a decision:
- Environments handling sensitive or regulated data (healthcare, finance, government)
- Mission-critical systems where downtime has significant business impact
- Deployments with strict regulatory requirements that must be independently validated
For each situation, compare Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's measured trust score of 56.6/100 and its individual signals against your organization's own criteria. Nerq does not assert whether Obsidian Filesystem Mcp is suitable for any particular use.
How Obsidian Filesystem Mcp Compares to Industry Standards
Nerq indexes over 6 million software tools, apps, and packages across dozens of categories. Among DevOps tools, the average Trust Score is 63/100. Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's score of 56.6/100 is near the category average of 63/100.
This places Obsidian Filesystem Mcp in line with the typical DevOps tool tool. It meets baseline expectations but does not distinguish itself from peers on trust metrics.
Industry benchmarks matter because they contextualize a tool's safety profile. A score that looks moderate in isolation may actually represent strong performance within a challenging category — or vice versa. Nerq's category-relative analysis helps teams make informed decisions by showing not just absolute quality, but how a tool ranks against its direct peers.
Trust Score History
Nerq continuously monitors Obsidian Filesystem Mcp and recalculates its Trust Score as new data becomes available. Our scoring engine ingests real-time signals from source repositories, vulnerability databases (NVD, OSV.dev), package registries, and community metrics. When a new CVE is published, a major release ships, or maintenance patterns change, Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's score is updated within 24 hours.
Historical trust trends reveal whether a tool is improving, stable, or declining over time. A tool that consistently maintains or improves its score demonstrates ongoing commitment to security and quality. Conversely, a downward trend may signal reduced maintenance, growing technical debt, or unresolved vulnerabilities. To track Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's score over time, use the Nerq API: GET nerq.ai/v1/preflight?target=obsidian-filesystem-mcp&include=history
Nerq retains trust score snapshots at regular intervals, enabling trend analysis across weeks and months. Enterprise users can access detailed historical reports showing how each dimension — security, maintenance, documentation, compliance, and community — has evolved independently, providing granular visibility into which aspects of Obsidian Filesystem Mcp are strengthening or weakening over time.
Obsidian Filesystem Mcp vs Alternatives
In the devops category, Obsidian Filesystem Mcp scores 56.6/100. There are higher-scoring alternatives available. For a detailed comparison, see:
- Obsidian Filesystem Mcp vs ansible — Trust Score: 74.9/100
- Obsidian Filesystem Mcp vs Flowise — Trust Score: 67.5/100
- Obsidian Filesystem Mcp vs learn-claude-code — Trust Score: 72.1/100
Key Takeaways
- Obsidian Filesystem Mcp has a measured Nerq Trust Score of 56.6/100 (D) — a composite of independent signals, not a suitability judgment.
- Among DevOps tools, Obsidian Filesystem Mcp scores near the category average of 63/100 (a positional measurement relative to peers).
- The individual signals — security, maintenance, documentation, compliance, community — are shown above. Weigh them against your own requirements.
- Query the current measured values via Nerq's Preflight API.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp Safe?
What is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's trust score?
What are safer alternatives to Obsidian Filesystem Mcp?
How often is Obsidian Filesystem Mcp's safety score updated?
Can I use Obsidian Filesystem Mcp in a regulated environment?
See Also
Disclaimer: Nerq trust scores are automated measurements based on publicly available signals. They are not endorsements, verdicts, or guarantees of suitability. Always evaluate the signals against your own requirements.