Search: “MCP”

16 stories

Searchkeyword smart Sortlatest hot importance relevance

DomainAll Cyber AIWindow24h 3d 7d 30d AllIn the wild Important only Show duplicates

CategoryAll Vulnerability 137 AI safety & security 118 Policy & legal 52 Exploit / PoC 51 Malware 34 AI tools & infra 31 Model release 22 Ransomware 20 Industry 19 Threat actor 18 Tools 16 Data breach 14 Phishing & fraud 13 AI industry 13

SeverityAll critical 173 high 80 medium 164 low 43 info 118

How MCP Servers Can Expose Enterprise Secrets

MCP servers holding AI agent credentials risk secret exposure via plaintext configs, credential sprawl, prompt injection, and over-permissioning; mitigations include centralization and least privilege.

The article examines how Model Context Protocol servers, which hold API keys, tokens, and service-account credentials for AI agents, can leak enterprise secrets. Documented exposure paths include plaintext credentials in config files, ungoverned credential sprawl, prompt injection, over-permissioning, and untrusted third-party servers. It cites CVE-2025-6514 in mcp-remote (400,000+ downloads), where a malicious server triggered OS command injection leading to remote code execution. Recommended mitigations include centralized secret stores, short-lived auto-rotated credentials, least privilege, and human approval for sensitive actions.

The Hacker NewsAug 17, 11:58 UTC · Aug 17, 2026AI safety & security CVE-2025-6514

One in four MCP servers opens AI agent security to code execution risk

Noma Security whitepaper finds most popular AI Skills and many MCP servers carry high-risk capabilities, with state changes most prevalent.

Noma Security analyzed hundreds of popular MCP servers and Skills across eight risk categories, finding most widely used Skills carry at least one risky characteristic and a typical enterprise runs well over a hundred high-risk agent tools, with arbitrary code execution common across MCP servers. The most prevalent risk is the ability to change state or data, and named toxic combinations include ContextCrush data leakage, ForcedLeak via poisoned Salesforce CRM records, DockerDash supply-chain compromise, the Replit production database deletion, and the hijacked Amazon Q VS Code extension. Building on OWASP LLM06:2025, the paper proposes the No Excessive CAP framework of capabilities, autonomy, and permissions, recommending allowlisting, MCP version pinning, approval gates on irreversible actions, and user-scoped expiring credentials.

Help Net SecurityAug 24, 04:21 UTC · 24d agoAI safety & security1

Malicious MCP Servers Can Split Instructions to Make AI Coding Agents Exfiltrate Secrets

ASSET Research Group's GhostSplice technique splits malicious instructions across MCP channels, tricking AI coding agents into exfiltrating SSH keys, source code, and secrets.

ASSET Research Group disclosed GhostSplice, a prompt-injection technique in which a malicious Model Context Protocol (MCP) server splits an exfiltration instruction across a tool description and a tool result so no single fragment appears harmful. In the reference implementation, a benign-looking integrity_checker tool with fields alpha through delta is later paired with a project-scan result mapping those fields to .ssh/id_rsa, proprietary source, customers.csv, and .env. Tests across eleven API-tested models showed average compliance rising from 42% to 82% when instructions were split in two, with GPT-4o, Gemini 2.0 Flash, and Llama 3.3 70B going from 0% to 100%. The findings come from controlled lab tests, not a reported real-world intrusion, and no CVE identifiers had been assigned as of August 10, 2026.

The Hacker NewsAug 11, 10:24 UTC · Aug 11, 2026AI safety & security1

When AI Agents Go Rogue: Agent Session Smuggling Attack in A2A Systems

Unit 42 unveils agent session smuggling, where a rogue AI agent hides covert instructions in established Agent2Agent (A2A) protocol sessions to manipulate victim agents.

Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 discovered agent session smuggling, a new attack technique in which a malicious AI agent exploits an established cross-agent session under the Agent2Agent (A2A) protocol to send covert instructions hidden among benign client requests and server responses. The technique leverages the implicit trust agents place in collaborating agents and the stateful, multi-turn nature of A2A sessions; the researchers stress it affects any stateful protocol, not an A2A flaw. Unlike one-shot data-based attacks, a rogue agent can converse, adapt and build false trust over multiple interactions. Proposed mitigations include human-in-the-loop enforcement, cryptographically signed AgentCards for remote agent verification, and context-grounding to detect injected instructions.

Palo Alto Unit 42Aug 17, 12:32 UTC · Aug 17, 2026AI safety & security2

Securing Claude Code: The New Compliance API, Local Visibility, and Identity Governance

Anthropic's new Compliance API endpoints expose Claude Code local session transcripts, highlighting governance gaps for endpoint AI agents.

Anthropic added local session transcript endpoints to its Compliance API on August 11, 2026, giving security teams visibility into prompts, bash commands, file operations, and MCP commands run by Claude Code harnesses on endpoints. The article argues local harnesses break the classic shared-responsibility model, citing Token Security data that 68.6% of discovered AI agents run on endpoints, and a Cloud Security Alliance survey of 418 IT and security professionals in which 82% found an unknown agent within the past year. It outlines three governance layers: Anthropic managed settings as a policy baseline, the Compliance API for cloud-visible transcripts, and endpoint telemetry to connect agent activity to identity, credentials, and permissions.

The Hacker NewsAug 31, 11:31 UTC · 17d agoAI safety & security1

Characterizing Network Centralization and Observability in the Remote MCP Ecosystem

A measurement study of 179 remote MCP servers finds heavy infrastructure concentration (HHI 0.736) and a security-observability tradeoff in platform OAuth.

The paper introduces a three-tier observability framework (catalog metadata, passive compliance signals, live vulnerability analysis) applied to a stratified sample of 179 remote Model Context Protocol (MCP) endpoints from two public registries. The Herfindahl-Hirschman Index over ASN distribution is 0.736, well above the 0.25 high-concentration threshold, and 95% of commercial PaaS-hosted servers enforce gateway-level OAuth 2.1 with PKCE. Authentication correlates strongly with hosting platform choice rather than operator configuration, creating a security-observability tradeoff that constrains automated scanning for tool-poisoning vectors without prior credentials.

arXiv cs.CRSep 16, 17:31 UTC · 19h agoAI safety & security

AI supply chain risk is showing up in developer workflows first

Zentera Systems CEO says AI supply chain attacks currently hit developer workflows first, advising segmentation over tooling and citing the Phantom Raven campaign.

In an interview, Zentera Systems CEO Dr. Jaushin Lee argues that most active AI supply chain incidents target developer workflows and open-source package repositories, while poisoned model weights, compromised MCP servers, and poisoned vector stores remain largely in research and demos. He cites the active 'Phantom Raven' campaign, where attackers register AI-hallucinated package names in public repositories with malicious payloads that silently infect vibe-coding build pipelines. He recommends software-defined segmentation, semiconductor-style project enclaves with egress controls, and warns that self-hosting models without agent sandboxing leaves exposure unchanged.

Help Net SecurityAug 25, 00:00 UTC · 23d agoAI safety & security

Who's governing your AI? A trust framework for enterprise agents and models

DigiCert pitches AI Trust framework using PKI, DNS policy records and workload identity to govern shadow AI agents across enterprises.

The Register-sponsored piece outlines DigiCert's AI Trust framework for governing AI agents, built on PKI, DNS, and attestation, citing IBM's 2026 Cost of a Data Breach report that 68% of organizations lack AI governance or shadow AI detection. The approach treats agent identity as workload identity aligned with IETF WIMSE, NIST CSF 2.0, and SPIFFE/SPIRE, using short-lived credentials instead of static API keys. DigiCert also proposes DMARC-style DNS agent policy records and an AI Agent Passport cryptographically binding agent identity to approved operations, with a unified kill switch.

The Register · SecuritySep 15, 15:00 UTC · 1d agoAI safety & security1

10 most critical LLM vulnerabilities

OWASP updated its Top 10 LLM application vulnerabilities, ranking prompt injection first and elevating excessive agency to third amid agentic adoption.

OWASP refreshed its Top 10 list of critical vulnerabilities in LLM applications, for the first time incorporating real-world incident data alongside expert voting. Prompt injection and sensitive information disclosure remain first and second, while excessive agency jumped from sixth to third as agentic systems that call APIs and execute code proliferate. Unbounded consumption of AI resources rose in prominence, while improper output handling dropped to the bottom as output sanitization becomes widespread. The list includes remediation guidance such as strict output schemas, human-in-the-loop approvals, and least-privilege credentials held in application code.

CSO OnlineSep 10, 08:25 UTC · 7d agoAI safety & security

Authorization Architectures for Tool-Using AI Agents

Review paper proposes an authorization reference architecture for tool-using AI agents, identifying runtime enforcement and delegation bounds as unresolved gaps.

This review examines authorization models for tool-using AI agents that invoke APIs, databases, browsers, and protocols like MCP, arguing every consequential agent action must be traceable to a human principal, bounded by delegation, and contestable. It introduces a principal hierarchy spanning human user, operator/deployer, orchestrator agent, sub-agent, and tool endpoint, and analyzes five layers including credential lifecycle, delegation propagation, runtime enforcement, prompt injection as authorization bypass, and auditability. Drawing on 89 primary sources from 2023-2026, it proposes seven structural requirements, a four-layer reference architecture, and three deployable configurations.

arXiv cs.CRSep 14, 17:21 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security

The AI Supply Chain Has a Security Problem, and Much of It Is Sitting on the Open Internet

Researchers counted 36,769 publicly reachable self-hosted AI endpoints, only about 2% behind HTTP authentication, exposing Ollama, vLLM, and Flowise to abuse.

A Mysterium VPN study found 36,769 self-hosted AI endpoints reachable through internet scanning, with only 2.02% returning an HTTP authentication challenge. Open WebUI accounted for 18,529 reachable instances, Ollama for 6,935 fingerprinted hosts, and 5,223 agent-builder and workflow platforms were exposed, often holding API keys, database credentials, and other secrets. The report highlights LLMjacking risk from exposed Ollama APIs, a critical Flowise bug (CVE-2026-40933), leaked n8n tokens, and prior SentinelOne/Censys research finding roughly 175,000 exposed Ollama hosts in 130 countries.

Security AffairsSep 11, 17:27 UTC · 5d agoAI safety & security CVE-2026-409331

Securing AI agents: Key controls and best practices

Security experts warn AI agents with employee-level privileges outpace human access controls and advise layered enforcement, sandboxing, and approval gates.

CSO reports that enterprises granting AI agents credentials, tools, and network access face risks that human-focused identity controls cannot contain, including machine-speed action chaining and sub-agent spawning. Experts from Strike Graph, Veracode, Delinea, and XBOW recommend treating agents as privileged insiders with hard technical boundaries: egress proxies with allowlists, short-lived brokered tokens, separated read/write rights, and approval for high-risk actions. XBOW describes a layered architecture with a guardian model reviewing agent actions and per-agent audit files. OWASP guidance on excessive agency urges limiting agent functions, permissions, and autonomy with authorization enforced downstream.

CSO OnlineSep 8, 08:25 UTC · 9d agoAI safety & security

How to secure edge AI in customer-owned environments

Microsoft outlines security architecture guidance for edge AI, urging runtime attestation, artifact provenance, and deterministic mediation of model actions.

Microsoft details how edge AI shifts trust responsibilities to customers operating their own infrastructure, where prompt injection, model tampering, and malicious firmware updates can occur alongside model weights, credentials, and physical-system access. The guidance recommends verifying runtimes with attestation, verifying AI artifacts with provenance, and constraining model actions through a deterministic mediator outside the model. It also covers new exposure surfaces from MCP, multi-agent systems, and computer-use agents running in disconnected or hostile edge environments.

Microsoft Security BlogSep 4, 19:10 UTC · 12d agoAI safety & security

Ping Identity introduces enterprise security for personal AI agents

Ping Identity launched Enterprise Personal Agent Access to discover, authenticate and control personal AI agents like Claude at runtime.

Ping Identity announced Enterprise Personal Agent Access, delivered through PingOne Privilege, to give enterprises visibility and control over personal AI agents such as Claude and Claude Code. The product discovers agents including shadow AI, associates each session with the user and device behind it, and enforces allow, deny, log, human-approval or revocation decisions on agent access at runtime. It enables secretless developer workflows so agents can commit code without long-lived credentials while keeping actions attributable to the agent. Ping cites Gravitee research that 48% of production AI agents run unsecured and says the product is available now and piloting with global enterprises.

Help Net SecuritySep 3, 06:25 UTC · 14d agoAI safety & security

AI deployments are stretching enterprise security to its limits

NetFoundry survey finds AI deployments will expand enterprise attack surfaces by 14%, with 90% of leaders worried about unapproved employee AI use.

NetFoundry's 2026 State of Secure AI Access survey found CISOs and CTOs expect AI deployments to grow attack surfaces by an average 14% within a year, with 90% concerned about employees using unapproved AI tools. Only 15% expressed high confidence that existing tools protect AI deployments, while non-human identities, static credentials and internet-facing APIs drive risk, and vulnerability exploitation now accounts for about 31% of breaches. Security reviews and network changes add an average eight days to AI deployments, and the median time to patch known exploited vulnerabilities has risen to 43 days.

Help Net SecurityAug 12, 00:00 UTC · Aug 12, 2026AI safety & security

13 million tool calls: auditing every AI coding agent action with Elastic Agent

Elastic Security Labs shows how Cursor hooks plus Elastic Agent turn AI coding agent activity into 13 million huntable security events.

Elastic Security Labs demonstrates auditing AI coding agent behavior by pairing Cursor hooks with Elastic Agent, capturing every tool call, shell command, file read, and MCP request as structured events. The dataset of 13 million captured events can be hunted with ES|QL, giving defenders visibility into agent actions.

Elastic Security LabsAug 11, 00:00 UTC · Aug 11, 2026AI safety & security1