What can mcp-auth do?

oauth 2.0 / openid connect server integration for mcp, mcp protocol-aware token validation and session management, multi-provider identity federation for mcp clients, credential exchange and token refresh orchestration, mcp resource and tool access control based on authentication context, secure credential storage and secrets management integration

mcp-auth

MCP ServerFree

Plug and play auth for Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers

Open Source

/ 100

6 capabilities

Capabilities6 decomposed

oauth 2.0 / openid connect server integration for mcp

Medium confidence

Implements OAuth 2.0 and OpenID Connect (OIDC) authentication flows as a plug-and-play MCP server capability, handling authorization code exchange, token validation, and identity provider integration. Uses standard OAuth/OIDC protocols to delegate authentication to external identity providers (Google, GitHub, Auth0, etc.) rather than managing credentials directly, reducing security surface area and enabling single sign-on across MCP clients.

Solves for

I want my MCP server to authenticate users via their existing OAuth provider without building auth from scratchI need to integrate my MCP server with an enterprise OIDC identity provider for SSOI want to delegate authentication responsibility to a third-party provider rather than storing passwords

Best for

MCP server developers building multi-tenant or user-facing applications

Teams integrating MCP into enterprise environments with existing identity infrastructure

Developers wanting to avoid implementing custom authentication logic

Requires

Node.js 16+ (typical MCP server runtime)

OAuth 2.0 or OpenID Connect provider with client credentials (client_id, client_secret)

Configured redirect URI matching provider settings

Limitations

Requires pre-configured OAuth/OIDC provider with registered application credentials

No built-in support for custom authentication schemes beyond OAuth 2.0/OIDC standard

Token refresh and expiration handling depends on provider implementation details

What makes it unique

Purpose-built as a drop-in MCP server capability rather than a generic OAuth library, abstracting MCP-specific authentication patterns and reducing boilerplate for MCP developers integrating external identity providers

vs alternatives

Simpler than building OAuth integration manually with passport.js or similar libraries because it's tailored specifically to MCP server architecture and protocols

mcp protocol-aware token validation and session management

Medium confidence

Validates authentication tokens within the MCP request/response lifecycle, managing session state and enforcing token expiration policies at the MCP server level. Intercepts MCP tool calls and resource requests to verify valid authentication before execution, implementing middleware-style authentication guards that integrate with MCP's resource and tool calling architecture rather than HTTP-level middleware.

Solves for

I want to ensure only authenticated clients can call specific MCP tools or access resourcesI need to validate tokens on every MCP request and reject expired or invalid sessionsI want to attach user context (claims, permissions) to each MCP tool invocation

Best for

MCP server developers building secure multi-client systems

Teams needing per-request authentication enforcement at the MCP protocol level

Applications where HTTP middleware authentication is insufficient

Requires

Token validation library (e.g., jsonwebtoken for JWT)

MCP server implementation with access to request context

Token issuer public key or shared secret for validation

Limitations

Token validation adds latency to every MCP request (cryptographic verification)

No built-in distributed session store — requires external state management for token revocation

Limited to token-based authentication (JWT, opaque tokens) — no session cookie support in MCP context

What makes it unique

Implements authentication validation at the MCP protocol layer (tool calls, resource requests) rather than HTTP transport layer, enabling fine-grained per-capability access control within MCP's resource and tool calling model

vs alternatives

More granular than HTTP-level authentication because it validates at the MCP message level, allowing different authentication policies per tool or resource

multi-provider identity federation for mcp clients

Medium confidence

Abstracts multiple OAuth/OIDC providers behind a unified authentication interface, allowing MCP clients to authenticate via any configured provider (Google, GitHub, Auth0, custom OIDC) without client-side provider selection logic. Routes authentication requests to the appropriate provider based on configuration or client hints, normalizing user identity attributes across providers into a consistent schema.

Solves for

I want my MCP server to accept authentication from multiple identity providers without duplicating auth codeI need to normalize user identity from different providers (Google, GitHub, corporate OIDC) into a single user modelI want to support provider-agnostic MCP clients that don't know which identity provider to use

Best for

MCP servers serving diverse user bases with different identity providers

Enterprise deployments supporting both public OAuth (GitHub) and internal OIDC

SaaS MCP platforms offering flexible authentication options

Requires

Configuration for each supported OAuth/OIDC provider

Provider-specific client credentials (client_id, client_secret) for each provider

User identity mapping/normalization logic

Limitations

Requires managing multiple provider configurations and credentials

User identity normalization across providers may lose provider-specific attributes

No built-in account linking — users with same email from different providers treated as separate identities

What makes it unique

Provides provider-agnostic authentication abstraction specifically for MCP servers, handling provider routing and identity normalization transparently rather than requiring clients to specify providers

vs alternatives

Simpler than implementing provider-specific logic in each MCP client because the server handles all provider routing and normalization centrally

credential exchange and token refresh orchestration

Medium confidence

Manages OAuth token lifecycle including refresh token handling, automatic token renewal, and credential rotation for long-lived MCP server sessions. Implements refresh token grant flows to obtain new access tokens before expiration, storing and rotating credentials securely, and handling provider-specific token refresh policies (expiration windows, refresh token rotation, etc.).

Solves for

I want my MCP server to automatically refresh expired tokens without requiring user re-authenticationI need to handle long-lived MCP client sessions that span multiple token expiration cyclesI want to implement secure credential rotation and refresh token management

Best for

MCP servers supporting persistent client connections

Applications requiring uninterrupted service across token expiration boundaries

Teams implementing security best practices for credential rotation

Requires

Secure credential storage (encrypted database, secrets manager, or similar)

Refresh token from OAuth provider

Token expiration tracking mechanism

Limitations

Requires secure storage for refresh tokens (adds complexity vs stateless access tokens only)

Refresh token rotation policies vary by provider — no universal standard

If refresh token expires or is revoked, user must re-authenticate

What makes it unique

Automates token refresh at the MCP server level, handling provider-specific refresh policies and rotation strategies transparently without requiring client-side refresh logic

vs alternatives

More reliable than client-side token refresh because the server manages refresh proactively before expiration, preventing authentication failures mid-session

mcp resource and tool access control based on authentication context

Medium confidence

Enforces fine-grained access control on MCP resources and tool calls based on authenticated user identity and claims, implementing authorization policies that map user attributes (roles, scopes, groups) to specific MCP capabilities. Integrates with MCP's resource and tool calling architecture to gate access before execution, supporting both role-based access control (RBAC) and attribute-based access control (ABAC) patterns.

Solves for

I want to restrict certain MCP tools to authenticated users onlyI need to enforce role-based access control where only admin users can call sensitive toolsI want to implement scope-based authorization where users can only access resources matching their permissions

Best for

MCP servers with multi-tenant or role-based access requirements

Teams implementing least-privilege access patterns

Applications with sensitive tools requiring authorization beyond authentication

Requires

Authenticated user context with claims/attributes

Authorization policy definitions (role mappings, scope requirements)

Access control evaluation engine

Limitations

Requires explicit authorization policy definition for each tool/resource

No built-in role/permission management — requires external identity provider or custom store

Authorization checks add latency to every protected tool call

What makes it unique

Implements authorization at the MCP tool/resource level rather than HTTP endpoint level, enabling per-capability access control that aligns with MCP's resource and tool calling model

vs alternatives

More granular than HTTP-level authorization because it can enforce different policies per MCP tool or resource within a single endpoint

secure credential storage and secrets management integration

Medium confidence

Provides secure storage for sensitive authentication data (client secrets, refresh tokens, API keys) with encryption at rest and integration with external secrets management systems (AWS Secrets Manager, HashiCorp Vault, etc.). Abstracts credential retrieval and rotation, preventing secrets from being logged or exposed in configuration files, and supporting key rotation policies.

Solves for

I want to store OAuth client secrets and refresh tokens securely without hardcoding themI need to integrate my MCP server with a secrets management system like Vault or AWS Secrets ManagerI want to implement automatic credential rotation without manual intervention

Best for

Production MCP deployments handling sensitive credentials

Teams with security compliance requirements (SOC 2, HIPAA, etc.)

Organizations using centralized secrets management infrastructure

Requires

Encryption library (e.g., crypto module in Node.js)

Optional: external secrets manager (AWS Secrets Manager, Vault, etc.)

Key management infrastructure for encryption keys

Limitations

Requires external secrets store or encryption infrastructure

Adds latency for credential retrieval (network call to secrets manager)

Credential rotation policies must be coordinated with provider

What makes it unique

Provides MCP-specific credential management patterns, abstracting secrets storage and rotation for OAuth/OIDC credentials used by MCP servers rather than generic secrets management

vs alternatives

More specialized than generic secrets managers because it handles OAuth-specific credential types (refresh tokens, client secrets) and rotation patterns

Capabilities are decomposed by AI analysis. Each maps to specific user intents and improves with match feedback.

Related Artifactssharing capabilities

Artifacts that share capabilities with mcp-auth, ranked by overlap. Discovered automatically through the match graph.

MCP Server41

mcp-auth

Plug and play auth for Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers

oauth 2.0 / openid connect server integration for mcpmulti-provider identity federation for mcp clientsjwt token validation and claims extraction for mcp

3 shared capabilities

MCP Server24

C# MCP SDK

[Go MCP SDK](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/go-sdk)

client-side oauth flow and token managementoauth authentication and authorization for servers

2 shared capabilities

MCP Server37

typescript-sdk

The official TypeScript SDK for Model Context Protocol servers and clients

oauth 2.0 authentication flow with provider-specific implementations

1 shared capability

MCP Server37

modelcontextprotocol

Specification and documentation for the Model Context Protocol

oauth 2.1 authorization framework with token management and validation

1 shared capability

MCP Server46

Neon MCP Server

Manage Neon serverless Postgres databases and branches via MCP.

oauth 2.0 authentication server for remote mcp clients

1 shared capability

MCP Server30

Webrix MCP Gateway

** - Enterprise MCP gateway with SSO, RBAC, audit trails, and token vaults for secure, centralized AI agent access control. Deploy via Helm charts on-premise or in your cloud. [webrix.ai](https://webrix.ai)

enterprise sso integration with multi-provider federation

1 shared capability

Best For

✓MCP server developers building multi-tenant or user-facing applications
✓Teams integrating MCP into enterprise environments with existing identity infrastructure
✓Developers wanting to avoid implementing custom authentication logic
✓MCP server developers building secure multi-client systems
✓Teams needing per-request authentication enforcement at the MCP protocol level
✓Applications where HTTP middleware authentication is insufficient
✓MCP servers serving diverse user bases with different identity providers
✓Enterprise deployments supporting both public OAuth (GitHub) and internal OIDC

Known Limitations

⚠Requires pre-configured OAuth/OIDC provider with registered application credentials
⚠No built-in support for custom authentication schemes beyond OAuth 2.0/OIDC standard
⚠Token refresh and expiration handling depends on provider implementation details
⚠Adds network latency for each authentication flow (provider round-trip)
⚠Token validation adds latency to every MCP request (cryptographic verification)
⚠No built-in distributed session store — requires external state management for token revocation

Requirements

Node.js 16+ (typical MCP server runtime)OAuth 2.0 or OpenID Connect provider with client credentials (client_id, client_secret)Configured redirect URI matching provider settingsMCP server framework (e.g., @modelcontextprotocol/sdk)Token validation library (e.g., jsonwebtoken for JWT)MCP server implementation with access to request contextToken issuer public key or shared secret for validationConfiguration for each supported OAuth/OIDC provider

Input / Output

Accepts: authorization code (from OAuth provider redirect), provider configuration object (issuer URL, client credentials), access tokens (for validation), MCP request with authorization header or token parameter, token (JWT or opaque), validation rules/policies, provider identifier (e.g., 'google', 'github'), authorization code from selected provider, provider-specific user claims, refresh token, token expiration timestamp, provider configuration, user identity and claims, requested MCP tool or resource, authorization policy, credential data (client secret, refresh token, API key), credential identifier/name, encryption key

Produces: authenticated user identity object, access token, ID token (OIDC), user claims/attributes, validated user identity, token claims/payload, authorization decision (allow/deny), normalized user identity object, mapped user attributes (email, name, avatar, etc.), provider source identifier, new access token, new refresh token (if provider rotates), updated token expiration, filtered resource list (if applicable), access denial reason (for logging), encrypted credential, decrypted credential (for use), credential metadata (expiration, rotation status)

UnfragileRank

Adoption15%(30% weight)

Quality14%(25% weight)

Ecosystem48%(25% weight)

Match Graph10%(15% weight)

Freshness75%(5% weight)

UnfragileRank is computed from adoption signals, documentation quality, ecosystem connectivity, match graph feedback, and freshness. No artifact can pay for a higher rank.

Type: MCP Server

6 capabilities

Visit mcp-auth→

Package Details

npm

Registry

0.2.0

Version

Weekly Downloads

About

Plug and play auth for Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers

Alternatives to mcp-auth

IntelliCode50Extension

AI-assisted development

Compare →

GitHub Copilot Chat53Extension

AI chat features powered by Copilot

Compare →

GitHub Copilot52Extension

Your AI pair programmer

Compare →

Claude Code for VS Code52Extension

Claude Code for VS Code: Harness the power of Claude Code without leaving your IDE

Compare →

Are you the builder of mcp-auth?

Claim this artifact to get a verified badge, access match analytics, see which intents users search for, and manage your listing.

Claim this artifact →Verification via email

Get the weekly brief

New tools, rising stars, and what's actually worth your time. No spam.

Data Sources

mcp registry

Looking for something else?

Search →

Capabilities6 decomposed

oauth 2.0 / openid connect server integration for mcp

Medium confidence

Solves for

Best for

MCP server developers building multi-tenant or user-facing applications

Teams integrating MCP into enterprise environments with existing identity infrastructure

Developers wanting to avoid implementing custom authentication logic

Requires

Node.js 16+ (typical MCP server runtime)

OAuth 2.0 or OpenID Connect provider with client credentials (client_id, client_secret)

Configured redirect URI matching provider settings

Limitations

Requires pre-configured OAuth/OIDC provider with registered application credentials

No built-in support for custom authentication schemes beyond OAuth 2.0/OIDC standard

Token refresh and expiration handling depends on provider implementation details

What makes it unique

vs alternatives

Simpler than building OAuth integration manually with passport.js or similar libraries because it's tailored specifically to MCP server architecture and protocols

mcp protocol-aware token validation and session management

Medium confidence

Solves for

Best for

MCP server developers building secure multi-client systems

Teams needing per-request authentication enforcement at the MCP protocol level

Applications where HTTP middleware authentication is insufficient

Requires

Token validation library (e.g., jsonwebtoken for JWT)

MCP server implementation with access to request context

Token issuer public key or shared secret for validation

Limitations

Token validation adds latency to every MCP request (cryptographic verification)

No built-in distributed session store — requires external state management for token revocation

Limited to token-based authentication (JWT, opaque tokens) — no session cookie support in MCP context

What makes it unique

vs alternatives

More granular than HTTP-level authentication because it validates at the MCP message level, allowing different authentication policies per tool or resource

multi-provider identity federation for mcp clients

Medium confidence

Solves for

Best for

MCP servers serving diverse user bases with different identity providers

Enterprise deployments supporting both public OAuth (GitHub) and internal OIDC

SaaS MCP platforms offering flexible authentication options

Requires

Configuration for each supported OAuth/OIDC provider

Provider-specific client credentials (client_id, client_secret) for each provider

User identity mapping/normalization logic

Limitations

Requires managing multiple provider configurations and credentials

User identity normalization across providers may lose provider-specific attributes

No built-in account linking — users with same email from different providers treated as separate identities

What makes it unique

vs alternatives

Simpler than implementing provider-specific logic in each MCP client because the server handles all provider routing and normalization centrally

credential exchange and token refresh orchestration

Medium confidence

Solves for

Best for

MCP servers supporting persistent client connections

Applications requiring uninterrupted service across token expiration boundaries

Teams implementing security best practices for credential rotation

Requires

Secure credential storage (encrypted database, secrets manager, or similar)

Refresh token from OAuth provider

Token expiration tracking mechanism

Limitations

Requires secure storage for refresh tokens (adds complexity vs stateless access tokens only)

Refresh token rotation policies vary by provider — no universal standard

If refresh token expires or is revoked, user must re-authenticate

What makes it unique

Automates token refresh at the MCP server level, handling provider-specific refresh policies and rotation strategies transparently without requiring client-side refresh logic

vs alternatives

More reliable than client-side token refresh because the server manages refresh proactively before expiration, preventing authentication failures mid-session

mcp resource and tool access control based on authentication context

Medium confidence

Solves for

Best for

MCP servers with multi-tenant or role-based access requirements

Teams implementing least-privilege access patterns

Applications with sensitive tools requiring authorization beyond authentication

Requires

Authenticated user context with claims/attributes

Authorization policy definitions (role mappings, scope requirements)

Access control evaluation engine

Limitations

Requires explicit authorization policy definition for each tool/resource

No built-in role/permission management — requires external identity provider or custom store

Authorization checks add latency to every protected tool call

What makes it unique

Implements authorization at the MCP tool/resource level rather than HTTP endpoint level, enabling per-capability access control that aligns with MCP's resource and tool calling model

vs alternatives

More granular than HTTP-level authorization because it can enforce different policies per MCP tool or resource within a single endpoint

secure credential storage and secrets management integration

Medium confidence

Solves for

Best for

Production MCP deployments handling sensitive credentials

Teams with security compliance requirements (SOC 2, HIPAA, etc.)

Organizations using centralized secrets management infrastructure

Requires

Encryption library (e.g., crypto module in Node.js)

Optional: external secrets manager (AWS Secrets Manager, Vault, etc.)

Key management infrastructure for encryption keys

Limitations

Requires external secrets store or encryption infrastructure

Adds latency for credential retrieval (network call to secrets manager)

Credential rotation policies must be coordinated with provider

What makes it unique

Provides MCP-specific credential management patterns, abstracting secrets storage and rotation for OAuth/OIDC credentials used by MCP servers rather than generic secrets management

vs alternatives

More specialized than generic secrets managers because it handles OAuth-specific credential types (refresh tokens, client secrets) and rotation patterns

Capabilities are decomposed by AI analysis. Each maps to specific user intents and improves with match feedback.

Alternatives to mcp-auth

IntelliCode50Extension

AI-assisted development

Compare →

GitHub Copilot Chat53Extension

AI chat features powered by Copilot

Compare →

GitHub Copilot52Extension

Your AI pair programmer

Compare →

Claude Code for VS Code52Extension

Claude Code for VS Code: Harness the power of Claude Code without leaving your IDE

Compare →

mcp-auth

Capabilities6 decomposed

oauth 2.0 / openid connect server integration for mcp

mcp protocol-aware token validation and session management

multi-provider identity federation for mcp clients

credential exchange and token refresh orchestration

mcp resource and tool access control based on authentication context

secure credential storage and secrets management integration

Related Artifactssharing capabilities

mcp-auth

C# MCP SDK

typescript-sdk

modelcontextprotocol

Neon MCP Server

Webrix MCP Gateway

Best For

Known Limitations

Requirements

Input / Output

UnfragileRank

Package Details

About

Categories

Alternatives to mcp-auth

Are you the builder of mcp-auth?

Get the weekly brief

Data Sources

mcp-auth

Capabilities6 decomposed

oauth 2.0 / openid connect server integration for mcp

mcp protocol-aware token validation and session management

multi-provider identity federation for mcp clients

credential exchange and token refresh orchestration

mcp resource and tool access control based on authentication context

secure credential storage and secrets management integration

Related Artifactssharing capabilities

mcp-auth

C# MCP SDK

typescript-sdk

modelcontextprotocol

Neon MCP Server

Webrix MCP Gateway

Best For

Known Limitations

Requirements

Input / Output

UnfragileRank

Package Details

About

Categories

Alternatives to mcp-auth

Are you the builder of mcp-auth?

Get the weekly brief

Data Sources