Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dend 397 days ago
Just to add one piece of clarification - the comment around authorization is a bit out-of-date. We've worked closely with Anthropic and the broader security community to update that part of MCP and implement a proper separation between resource server (RS) and authorization server (AS) when it comes to roles. You can see this spec in draft[1] (it will be there until a new protocol version is ratified).

[1]: https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/draft/basic/au...
3 comments
lolinder 397 days ago
What percentage of the MCP spec is (was?) LLM output?

It's setting off all kinds of alarm bells for me, and I'm wondering if I'm on to something or if my LLM-detector alarms are miscalibrated.

link
dend 397 days ago
Can only speak for the authorization spec, where I am actively participating - zero. The entire spec was written, reviewed, re-written, and edited by real people, with real security backgrounds, without leaning into LLM-based generation.
link
_raz 397 days ago
Idk, I'm kind of agnostic and ended up throwing it in there.

Regurgitating the OAuth draft don't seem that usefull imho, and why am I forced into it if I'm using http. Seems like there are plenty of usecases where un-attended thing would like to interact over http, where we usually use other things aside from OAuth.

It all probably could have been replaced by

- The Client shall implement OAuth2 - The Server may implement OAuth2

link
dend 397 days ago
For local servers this doesn't matter as much. For remote servers - you won't really have any serious MCP servers without auth, and you want to have some level setting done between client and servers. OAuth 2.1 is a good middle ground.

That's also where, with the new spec, you don't actually need to implement anything from scratch. Server issues a 401 with WWW-Authenticate, pointing to metadata for authorization server locations. Client takes that and does discovery, followed by OAuth flow (clients can use many libraries for that). You don't need to implement your own OAuth server.

link
vlovich123 397 days ago
Bearer tokens work elsewhere and imho are drastically simpler than oauth
link
dend 397 days ago
But where would you get bearer tokens? How would you manage consent and scopes? What about revocation? OAuth is essentially the "engine" that gives you the bearer tokens you need for authorization.
link
_kidlike 397 days ago
I know it's not auth-related, but the main MCP "spec" says that it was inspired by LSP (language server protocol). Wouldn't something like HATEOAS be more apt?
link