mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Securing the Model Context Protocol (MCP): Risks, Controls, and Governance

arXiv 2511.20920 ↗First posted 25 Nov 2025cs.CRcited by 23

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) replaces static, developer-controlled API integrations with more dynamic, user-driven agent systems, which also introduces new security risks. As MCP adoption grows across community servers and major platforms, organizations encounter threats that existing AI governance frameworks (such as NIST AI RMF and ISO/IEC 42001) do not yet cover in detail. We focus on three types of adversaries that take advantage of MCP s flexibility: content-injection attackers that embed malicious instructions into otherwise legitimate data; supply-chain attackers who distribute compromised servers; and agents who become unintentional adversaries by over-stepping their role. Based on early incidents and proof-of-concept attacks, we describe how MCP can increase the attack surface through data-driven exfiltration, tool poisoning, and cross-system privilege escalation. In response, we propose a set of practical controls, including per-user authentication with scoped authorization, provenance tracking across agent workflows, containerized sandboxing with input/output checks, inline policy enforcement with DLP and anomaly detection, and centralized governance using private registries or gateway layers. The aim is to help organizations ensure that unvetted code does not run outside a sandbox, tools are not used beyond their intended scope, data exfiltration attempts are detectable, and actions can be audited end-to-end. We close by outlining open research questions around verifiable registries, formal methods for these dynamic systems, and privacy-preserving agent operations.

Key facts. Cited by 23 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 25 Nov 2025.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 23.

23 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2026Security Threat Modeling for Emerging AI-Agent Protocols: A Comparative Analysis of MCP, A2A, Agora, and ANPcited by 15
  2. 2026Model Context Protocol Threat Modeling and Analyzing Vulnerabilities to Prompt Injection with Tool Poisoningcited by 10
  3. 2026Do Coding Agents Understand Least-Privilege Authorization?cited by 6
  4. 2026Don't believe everything you read: Understanding and Measuring MCP Behavior under Misleading Tool Descriptionscited by 5
  5. 2026Polymer-Agent: Large Language Model Agent for Polymer Designcited by 3
  6. 2026MCPShield: A Security Cognition Layer for Adaptive Trust Calibration in Model Context Protocol Agentscited by 3
  7. 2026From Tool Orchestration to Code Execution: A Study of MCP Design Choicescited by 3
  8. 2026Autonomy and Agency in Agentic AI: Architectural Tactics for Regulated Contextscited by 3
  9. 2026Verifiable Manifest Signing and Transparency Enforcement for Secure MCP-Based LLM Pipelinescited by 2
  10. 2026MCP-DPT: A Defense-Placement Taxonomy and Coverage Analysis for Model Context Protocol Securitycited by 2
  11. 2026Give Them an Inch and They Will Take a Mile:Understanding and Measuring Caller Identity Confusion in MCP-Based AI Systemscited by 1
  12. 2026Bypassing Document Ingestion: An MCP Approach to Financial Q&Acited by 1
11 more
  1. 2026The Interlocutor Effect: Why LLMs Leak More Personal Data to Agents Than Humanscited by 1
  2. 2026A Decision-Centered Reference Architecture for Trustworthy Agentic Commercecited by 1
  3. 2026ToolMinimize: Auditing and Rewriting LLM Agent Tool Calls to Minimize Privacy Exposurecited by 1
  4. 2026Security Risks in Tool-Enabled AI Agents: A Systematic Analysis of Privileged Execution Environmentscited by 0
  5. 2026Understanding How Enterprises Adopt the Model Context Protocol for LLM-Driven Software Engineeringcited by 0
  6. 2026Why Trust Your Agent? Empirical Security Gains from TRiSM-Guided Agentic Workflows in Healthcarecited by 0
  7. 2026An Agentic Interface for End-to-End Probabilistic Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysiscited by 0
  8. 2026Cross-Agent Campaign Attribution: Linking Asynchronous Attacks Across LLM Agentscited by 0
  9. 2026On Understanding, Identifying, and Mitigating Vulnerabilities in Agentic Large Language Modelscited by 0
  10. 2026AEGIS: Preventing Cross-Domain Resource Abuse in MCPcited by 0
  11. 2026Zero-Trust Authorization and Discovery for Enterprise MCPcited by 0

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Model Context Protocol (MCP): Landscape, Security Threats, and Future Research Directions
  2. 2025MCPGuard : Automatically Detecting Vulnerabilities in MCP Servers
  3. 2025Enterprise-Grade Security for the Model Context Protocol (MCP): Frameworks and Mitigation Strategies
  4. 2025When MCP Servers Attack: Taxonomy, Feasibility, and Mitigation
  5. 2026A Formal Security Framework for MCP-Based AI Agents: Threat Taxonomy, Verification Models, and Defense Mechanisms
  6. 2025MCPXKIT: The Unified Toolkit for Analyzing Model Context Protocol Security
  7. 2025Beyond the Protocol: Unveiling Attack Vectors in the Model Context Protocol (MCP) Ecosystem
  8. 2025MCP Guardian: A Security-First Layer for Safeguarding MCP-Based AI System