Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

blog.modelcontextprotocol.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 124 posts

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#91

Post by SkyPuncher »

mooreds wrote: post #88
SkyPuncher wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is great for normal "apps". We have a really deep need for a lower touch way for our users to interact with us agentically without setting up MCP. It'd be really great to have some sort of temporary session or out-of-band token storage available. Here's our use case: During the sales cycle, the buyer and seller need to exchange a bunch of information then analyze it (which is increasingly agentic). The problem w…

> The problem with MCP is the initial setup friction is far greater than users login in themselves and grabbing the information they need. Can you tell me more about this? With just-in-time client registration (DCR or CIMD) it seems like the MCP registration would be pretty simple. Is it the configuration of the MCP client to know about the MCP server that is the issue? Does the website need to be able to advertise "…

Yes, it’s the friction of setting up the MCP server in the first place. Especially, in environments where that is not straightforward or easy to do. When our users are looking for information, they don’t want to figure out how to setup the MCP.

I don’t think this is about advertising an MCP at all. All of this can be accomplished with plain old HTTP requests. I want to be able to tell users “tell your LLM do go to https://example.com/only-bots”.

There’s absolutely no need for an MCP, because the website will tell the LLM everything it needs to know, including other actions and endpoints available.

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#92

Post by mooreds »

debarshri wrote: post #90
mooreds wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that this extension points out other benefits to MCP over skills: * centralized control * ease of use for employees * auditing/compliance * deployment model It seems the state of the art for deploying skills is "copy this file and put it in this place" or "check out this repo and add a symlink" or "run this slash command to install the skill". (I'm not aware of any solution that pushes skills out.) These opti…

All the points that you are mentioning, you can technically do with tools too. We do that at adaptive [1]. We are building privileges access stuff for agents, and it works. The usecases you are mentioning can be done with tools via our platform. [1] https://adaptive.live

> you can technically do with tools too

By tools, do you mean skills? Or do I misunderstand you?

Thanks for sharing your solution. I clicked around and the information on your site is sparse. The postgresql page[0] doesn't really illustrate how your system works; just says that it does.

Regardless, there's a big difference between a proprietary way to inject skills and MCP, a standardized way to control access and deploy AI compatible logic.

0: https://adaptive.live/integrations/postgresql

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#93

Post by mooreds »

SkyPuncher wrote: post #91
mooreds wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem with MCP is the initial setup friction is far greater than users login in themselves and grabbing the information they need. Can you tell me more about this? With just-in-time client registration (DCR or CIMD) it seems like the MCP registration would be pretty simple. Is it the configuration of the MCP client to know about the MCP server that is the issue? Does the website need to be able to advertise "…

Yes, it’s the friction of setting up the MCP server in the first place. Especially, in environments where that is not straightforward or easy to do. When our users are looking for information, they don’t want to figure out how to setup the MCP. I don’t think this is about advertising an MCP at all. All of this can be accomplished with plain old HTTP requests. I want to be able to tell users “tell your LLM do go to ht…

Have you seen WebMCP[0]? Had a customer ask about this recently.

It seems like it might be something of what you are looking for, since it leverages HTML to tell agents about website functionality.

One issue I see with WebMCP is that agents basically free-ride on user identity and authentication, which is problematic in some scenarios.

0: https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/webmcp

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#94

Post by debarshri »

mooreds wrote: post #92
debarshri wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the points that you are mentioning, you can technically do with tools too. We do that at adaptive [1]. We are building privileges access stuff for agents, and it works. The usecases you are mentioning can be done with tools via our platform. [1] https://adaptive.live

> you can technically do with tools too By tools, do you mean skills? Or do I misunderstand you? Thanks for sharing your solution. I clicked around and the information on your site is sparse. The postgresql page[0] doesn't really illustrate how your system works; just says that it does. Regardless, there's a big difference between a proprietary way to inject skills and MCP, a standardized way to control access and de…

Apologies about the sparse information. We’re preparing for a launch. Thought this would be a great place to make the comment. It is indeed a combination of tools and skills.

Your argument is fair but yea, we are seeing adoption because tools often map to users mental model of how they want to use the agent.

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#95

Post by dalenw »

programmancer wrote: post #68

I am currently trying to use Microsoft Entra ID auth for an MCP server I'm implementing, and I genuinely feel like I must be an idiot. - I can use the `WWW-Authenticate` header to indicate a resource metadata URL for the client. - I can use this to indicate an authorization server (Microsoft Entra) and a scope (for the app registration that handle which app roles each user is given to differentiate different capabili…

I actually implemented this yesterday. The gist is this library runs the MCP server: https://csharp.sdk.modelcontextprotocol.io/concepts/identity...

Then I build an authbroker application using openid to handle client registration and build the jwt. End result is something that can determine tool availability and permission using an employees department, or other criteria.

So yeah the dynamic client registration is needed.

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#96

Post by dend »

erebe__ wrote: post #76
programmancer wrote: post #68

I am currently trying to use Microsoft Entra ID auth for an MCP server I'm implementing, and I genuinely feel like I must be an idiot. - I can use the `WWW-Authenticate` header to indicate a resource metadata URL for the client. - I can use this to indicate an authorization server (Microsoft Entra) and a scope (for the app registration that handle which app roles each user is given to differentiate different capabili…

We had the same issue with the client_id and for security reason we weren't willing to enable DCR. What we ended up doing, was the app proxying the OAuth flow, to inject a hardcoded client_id. So we lie to the MCP client telling it we support DCR while behind the hood we use a standalone client_id as usual for the MCP. If you want to take example at it https://gist.github.com/erebe/a5de36d42214721b2466fb0e66f61c...

Depending on the setup, you just have to be really careful to avoid confused deputy scenarios.

I wrote about it: https://den.dev/blog/mcp-confused-deputy-api-management/

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#97

Post by mooreds »

debarshri wrote: post #94
mooreds wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can technically do with tools too By tools, do you mean skills? Or do I misunderstand you? Thanks for sharing your solution. I clicked around and the information on your site is sparse. The postgresql page[0] doesn't really illustrate how your system works; just says that it does. Regardless, there's a big difference between a proprietary way to inject skills and MCP, a standardized way to control access and de…

Apologies about the sparse information. We’re preparing for a launch. Thought this would be a great place to make the comment. It is indeed a combination of tools and skills. Your argument is fair but yea, we are seeing adoption because tools often map to users mental model of how they want to use the agent.

No worries, always appreciate the discussion. Good luck on the launch!

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#98

Post by blcknight »

mooreds wrote: post #86
sean_lynch wrote: post #14

Before you get too far into the usual “MCP is dead, Skills forever” debate The real valuable capability MCP offers over skills/CLI is isolating the auth flow outside of the agent’s context window, and potentially out of the harness completely. This is valuable from a security perspective obviously. It’s also just a much easier user experience for normies and large businesses adopting AI tools. I hear all the context…

I think that this extension points out other benefits to MCP over skills: * centralized control * ease of use for employees * auditing/compliance * deployment model It seems the state of the art for deploying skills is "copy this file and put it in this place" or "check out this repo and add a symlink" or "run this slash command to install the skill". (I'm not aware of any solution that pushes skills out.) These opti…

There's a new standard in progress for skills over MCP

https://modelcontextprotocol.io/community/working-groups/ski...

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#99

Post by debarshri »

mooreds wrote: post #97
debarshri wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apologies about the sparse information. We’re preparing for a launch. Thought this would be a great place to make the comment. It is indeed a combination of tools and skills. Your argument is fair but yea, we are seeing adoption because tools often map to users mental model of how they want to use the agent.

No worries, always appreciate the discussion. Good luck on the launch!

You sound like someone who is technically well-versed with the landscape. would love to get some feedback from you.

Re: Zero-Touch OAuth for MCP

#100

Post by rhipitr »

mooreds wrote: post #86
sean_lynch wrote: post #14

Before you get too far into the usual “MCP is dead, Skills forever” debate The real valuable capability MCP offers over skills/CLI is isolating the auth flow outside of the agent’s context window, and potentially out of the harness completely. This is valuable from a security perspective obviously. It’s also just a much easier user experience for normies and large businesses adopting AI tools. I hear all the context…

I think that this extension points out other benefits to MCP over skills: * centralized control * ease of use for employees * auditing/compliance * deployment model It seems the state of the art for deploying skills is "copy this file and put it in this place" or "check out this repo and add a symlink" or "run this slash command to install the skill". (I'm not aware of any solution that pushes skills out.) These opti…

Isn’t tool drift/version also a benefit? Especially in scenarios where the use must be standardized and up to date?
Post reply on HN