Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | bdd_pomerium's commentslogin

This is very cool. Integrations look slick. Folks are understandably hyped—the potential for agents doing "deep research-style" work across broad data sources is real.

But the thread's security concerns—permissions, data protection, trust—are dead on. There is also a major authN/Z gap, especially for orgs that want MCP to access internal tools, not just curated SaaS.

Pushing complex auth logic (OAuth scopes, policy rules) into every MCP tool feels backwards.

* Access-control sprawl. Each tool reinvents security. Audits get messy fast.

* Static scopes vs. agent drift. Agents chain calls in ways no upfront scope list can predict. We need per-call, context checks.

* Zero-Trust principles mismatch. Central policy enforcement is the point. Fragmenting it kills visibility and consistency.

We already see the cost of fragmented auth: supply-chain hits and credential reuse blowing up multiple tenants. Agents only raise the stakes.

I think a better path (and in one in full disclosure, we're actively working on at Pomerium ) is to have:

* One single access point in front of all MCP resources.

* Single sign-on once, then short-lived signed claims flow downstream..

* AuthN separated from AuthZ with a centralized policy engine that evaluates every request, deny-by-default. Evaluation in both directions with hooks for DLP.

* Unified management, telemetry, audit log and policy surface.

I’m really excited about what MCP is putting us in the direction of being able to do with agents.

But without a higher level way to secure and manage the access, I’m afraid we’ll spend years patching holes tool by tool.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: