<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
Currently the `dns` and `http` based auth flows share code well in the
publisher tool. However there is a lot of duplication in the auth
endpoint. This on it's own is not a problem but it does make
enhancements to the proof record (the `v=MCPv1; ...` string) harder to
keep in sync.
This PR adds a `common.go` file to share logic between the two.
This supports work I am prototyping for
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/482.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Added new test cases for the permissions. Ran them before and after the
refactoring to ensure no behavior change.
Ran existing UTs.
Ran the integration tests.
Manually exercised the flows locally.
## Breaking Changes
None.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
## Motivation and Context
Replace server-only `http.MaxBytesReader(nil, ...)` with
`io.LimitReader` to cap the fetched body to 4KB in key fetcher. This
avoids passing a `nil` ResponseWriter and aligns with Go idioms. If more
than 4KB is received, return a clear error. Previously `MaxBytesReader`
returned a misleading `http: request body too large` error, which is
server-oriented. With this change the error becomes `HTTP auth key
response too large`.
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Add tests covering success, oversized bodies, connection failure,
non-200 status, and read failures. This covers almost all lines of
`FetchKey` method of `DefaultHTTPKeyFetcher`. For tests, I also added a
new initialiser `NewDefaultHTTPKeyFetcherWithClient` so that the HTTP
client could be modified for test use.
Tests use `httptest.NewTLSServer` plus a helper to construct a client
pinned to the test server.
`auth` package test coverage increased from 56.8% to 59.3%.
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
None.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
Signed-off-by: Ville Vesilehto <ville@vesilehto.fi>
## Summary
Fixes a concurrent map access vulnerability in the OIDC handler that
could cause remote unauthenticated DoS.
## Changes
- Removed OIDC authorization flow endpoints ( and )
- Removed the unsynchronized map that caused the data race
- Kept only the OIDC token exchange endpoint ()
- Simplified by removing OAuth2 flow dependencies
The map was being accessed concurrently by the start (write) and
callback (read/delete) endpoints without synchronization, causing
runtime panics. Since the token exchange flow doesn't require session
state, removing the authorization flow eliminates the vulnerability
entirely.
<!-- Provide a brief summary of your changes -->
## Motivation and Context
<!-- Why is this change needed? What problem does it solve? -->
The following PR eliminates duplicate struct definitions by migrating
the publisher tool to use canonical types from pkg/model, creating a
single source of truth across the codebase. The publisher tool
previously had its own copies of structs that were duplicated, ie.
ServerJSON, Package, Repository, VersionDetail, EnvironmentVariable,
RuntimeArgument and a few others which was not optimal
**Changes in the PR:**
- Refactored the structs to single canonical types located at pkg/model
- Refactor the implementation to use/build canonical structures directly
- Remove all duplicate definitions (5 structs eliminated)
- Publisher now uses model.ServerJSON, model.Package, model.Repository,
etc.
- Renamed some of the structs to better reflect their use case, i.e.
ServerJSON instead of ServerDetail
- Fixes an issue where the Remote property was missing from the previous
publisher copy of the Server
**Benefits:**
- Single source of truth - Schema changes in one place
- Type safety - Compiler catches mismatches
- Enhanced validation - Field constraints and bson tags
- Zero breaking changes - Same CLI interface and JSON output
- Future-proof - New canonical fields automatically available
Supersedes: #217 and #240
## How Has This Been Tested?
<!-- Have you tested this in a real application? Which scenarios were
tested? -->
Locally
## Breaking Changes
<!-- Will users need to update their code or configurations? -->
No
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [ ] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [ ] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [ ] New and existing tests pass locally
- [ ] I have added appropriate error handling
- [ ] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Signed-off-by: Radoslav Dimitrov <radoslav@stacklok.com>
## Summary
This PR implements OIDC authentication support for admin users,
specifically configured for Google Cloud Identity. The implementation
includes:
- Configurable OIDC authentication endpoints and validation
- Google Cloud Identity integration for admin access
- JWT token validation and user session management
- Deployment configuration updates for OIDC provider settings
Fixes#283
Add HTTP-based authentication to prove domain ownership, similar to
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/pull/238's DNS
authentication but using HTTPS well-known URIs instead of DNS TXT
records.
Fixes#280
## Motivation and Context
Some organizations don't have easy access to DNS records, but can easily
deploy web assets. They would therefore prefer to be able to complete a
HTTP challenge rather than a DNS one to authenticate to the registry.
This would in some way mirror ACME challenges: where you can do a DNS-01
or a HTTP-01 challenge.
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Tested locally by stubbing out the HTTP getter
- Added unit tests
## Breaking Changes
None
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
I concern I had when building this that it might expose us to SSRF
attacks.
I think on reflection this is not a significant problem:
- We only GET a fixed file `.well-known/mcp-registry-auth` (redirects
disallowed) after sanitizing the domain, and then also don't expose the
response to the user. This means the user shouldn't be able to hit
anything very interesting.
- The information they might get is what domains/servers exist in the
network. Our infrastructure is already all open-source, so attackers
aren't getting any additional real info by prodding at the environment
this way.
Fixes#270Closes#233
Adds support for DNS-based authentication for proving ownership of a
particular domain. E.g. if you can add a TXT record to `anthropic.com`,
you can publish anything at `com.anthropic/*` or `com.anthropic.*`.
Notes:
- Uses Ed25519 signatures with 15-second timestamp windows to prevent
replay attacks
- Supports multiple public keys in DNS TXT records for key rotation
scenarios
- Publisher CLI supports DNS auth via --dns-domain and --dns-private-key
flags
- Includes key generation commands in publisher README for easy setup
## Motivation and Context
This implements DNS-based public/private key authentication to allow
people to actually publish at their own domains. Currently,
authentication requires GitHub accounts which limits publishing to the
io.github.* namespace.
DNS-based auth enables:
- Publishing under your actual domain (e.g., com.anthropic/* for
anthropic.com)
- Independence from GitHub or other external auth providers
- Organizations managing their own keys and access to publishing
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Unit tests cover signature verification, DNS TXT parsing, timestamp
validation, and error cases
- Tested locally by editing my own DNS records
- All existing auth methods covered by passing tests
## Breaking Changes
None
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
Will be adding HTTP challenge auth in a similar way as a separate PR,
e.g. for verifying you own `github.com` by hosting a
`github.com/.well-known/mcp-server-challenge` or similar. Just
mentioning this as we discussed HTTP challenges as closely related to
DNS challenges elsewhere, and want to reassure reviewer that this hasn't
been forgotten with this approach. :) Update: tracking the HTTP auth in
https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/280
Adds support for auth'ing to the registry via [GitHub Actions
OIDC](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/concepts/security/openid-connect).
Fixes#271
## Motivation and Context
People will probably want to publish to the registry from CI
environments. DNS auth can work here fine
(https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/registry/issues/270). But for
people who haven't set up DNS, the standard GitHub device flow won't
really work here. We could make this nice by supporting GitHub Actions
OIDC.
## How Has This Been Tested?
Tested locally with a real GitHub OIDC token from a personal repo.
## Breaking Changes
None
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Motivation and Context
- Adds credentials for the new MCP Registry Login GitHub Apps (local,
staging, prod)
- Adds support for "none" auth to publisher
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Tested publisher workflows locally
- Unit and integration tests passing
## Breaking Changes
None
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [ ] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
---
Merging based on Tadas's approval review, and only making minor docs changes on top of that.
Fixes#264. Adds endpoints:
```
/v0/auth/github # exchange a github token for a registry token that gives you access to namespaces io.github.username and io.github.org for your orgs
/v0/auth/none # get a registry token for namespace io.modelcontextprotocol.anonymous (only for testing/local dev purposes)
```
Updates `/v0/publish` to accept one of these registry tokens.
## Motivation and Context
See #264
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Running locally and getting a token from `/v0/auth/none` and then
publishing to `/v0/publish`
- Updating the integration tests that get a token and then publish, and
them passing
## Breaking Changes
This is a breaking change to the auth API. This is fine for registry
given it's not deployed yet.
## Types of changes
<!-- What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an `x` in all
the boxes that apply: -->
- [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [x] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to change)
- [x] Documentation update
## Checklist
<!-- Go over all the following points, and put an `x` in all the boxes
that apply. -->
- [x] I have read the [MCP
Documentation](https://modelcontextprotocol.io)
- [x] My code follows the repository's style guidelines
- [x] New and existing tests pass locally
- [x] I have added appropriate error handling
- [x] I have added or updated documentation as needed
## Additional context
<!-- Add any other context, implementation notes, or design decisions
-->
---------
Co-authored-by: claude[bot] <209825114+claude[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: adam jones <domdomegg@users.noreply.github.com>
