Skip to content
Agentic Control Plane
Security series

MCP Security

Model Context Protocol is rapidly becoming the default integration layer between AI clients and tools. It also has six structural risks every deployment needs to account for. This series walks through each, with what breaks if you don’t mitigate.

Posts in this series

Each post focuses on one specific risk class.

  1. 1.
    I Classified 8,000+ MCP Servers by Auth Appropriateness. Most Get It Wrong.
    A static analysis of 8,216 MCP servers across 4 registries. 50.6% have no auth. But the real question is: do they have the right auth for what they do?
  2. 2.
    4,500 MCP Servers, 7,840 Tools, Zero Input Validation. Here's the Attack Surface.
    Analysis of 8,216 MCP servers: 2,432 expose high-risk inputs — SQL, file paths, shell commands — with zero validation constraints in the tool schema.
  3. 3.
    Can You Prove What Your AI Agent Did? I Checked 8,216 MCP Servers.
    74.9% of MCP servers have no mention of audit logging. The MCP spec defines zero audit primitives. Here's why that's a compliance problem.
  4. 4.
    MCP Servers Proxy Paid APIs With No Rate Limits. I Calculated the Blast Radius.
    180 MCP servers proxy calls to paid APIs like OpenAI and Stripe. 85% document no rate limits. An agent retry loop can cost $1,080/hour.
  5. 5.
    MCP Gateway Comparison: ACP vs Composio vs Self-Hosted
    An honest comparison of MCP gateway options. When to use ACP Cloud, Composio, or build your own with open-source tools.
  6. 6.
    4 Security Vulnerabilities Hiding in Your MCP Server's Tool Schema
    Real CVEs trace back to unconstrained tool schemas. From 8,216 MCP servers: the JSON patterns behind path traversal, SSRF, injection, and how to fix each.