How To Build A Cyber-Resilient Future With MCP And CTEM

Kiran Elengickal | VP at Siemba | AI, Cybersecurity, GTM Expert | Strategic Growth | Alliances | Innovation Leader.

The AI revolution is reshaping our digital landscape at unprecedented speed. As autonomous agents increasingly interact with external tools and services, the model context protocol (MCP) is emerging as a powerful enabler. This is leading to the standardization of how AI models fetch data, call functions and chain workflows.

With this, risks are also increasing by the day. While MCP promises seamless interoperability and operational efficiency, it also opens complex new threat surfaces that traditional cybersecurity frameworks are ill-prepared to manage.

At Siemba and Abilytics, I have learned that securing AI isn’t just about tech; it needs unified, proactive strategies as innovation speeds up.

Let’s explore how MCP is transforming AI tooling, the critical security vulnerabilities it introduces and why integrating continuous threat exposure management (CTEM) is essential to building a resilient AI-driven future.

The Shifting Cybersecurity Landscape

The current cybersecurity environment is dynamic, with threats continuously evolving to outpace static defenses. At the same time, AI itself acts as a double-edged sword, a force multiplier for both defenders and attackers alike.

As MCP standardizes the way AI models interact with external systems, the ecosystem shifts from fragmented, proprietary integrations to a unified but potentially riskier framework. This convergence demands continuous, proactive threat exposure management, not periodic audits.

From the evolving attack landscape, it is clear that security must be embedded at the foundation of MCP adoption, not retrofitted after breaches occur, hence the importance of CTEM and offensive security.

Understanding MCP: The Universal Language For AI Agents

Anthropic introduced MCP to solve a real problem: the growing fragmentation in AI tool integration. Inspired by the language server protocol (LSP) but designed for autonomous workflows, MCP allows AI agents to access live data, invoke external tools and chain multiple operations dynamically.

It defines two key roles:

• MCP servers (tool/service implementations) like Postgres, Resend (email), Slack and Blender

• MCP clients (applications/agents) like Cursor and Claude for Desktop

This universal interface significantly enhances developer productivity and user experience, but it also expands the attack surface exponentially.

Cybersecurity Implications Of MCP

1. A Broader Attack Surface

Each connected MCP server creates a potential new entry point for attackers. Integrating more servers multiplies the risk from email systems to database access and image generation APIs. Vulnerabilities in any connected service can be leveraged by attackers via the MCP-enabled AI agent, creating a classic AI supply chain risk.

2. Standardization Risks

The promise of interoperability comes at a cost: If vulnerabilities are discovered within MCP itself, they could propagate across the entire ecosystem. Where fragmented integrations once limited breach impact, standardization could now enable multisystem exploitability.

This phenomenon mirrors past lessons in internet security—a reminder that convenience without security hardening invites systemic failure.

3. Authentication And Authorization Gaps

Currently, MCP lacks standardized authentication frameworks. Each client-server pair must manually implement its own methods, leading to inconsistent, fragile security postures. Compounding the issue include:

• No Built-In Authorization Model: Once authenticated, agents often gain broad access to entire tool functions.

• Session-Wide Access: OAuth 2.1 standards provide only session-level granularity.

This leaves AI agents vulnerable to privilege escalation, impersonation attacks and uncontrolled access if not meticulously governed.

4. Data Security And Privacy Concerns

MCP enables AI models to fetch and manipulate data across services, making robust data protection critical. Without encryption, secure storage and tight access controls, sensitive information could leak, AI models could be poisoned or manipulated and privacy regulations like GDPR and CCPA could be violated.

5. Need For Centralized Control

Scaling MCP deployments will soon necessitate centralized management layers. An MCP gateway could enforce:

• Unified authentication and authorization

• Traffic control and intelligent routing

• Load balancing and observability

• Threat detection at the communication layer

This is vital in multi-tenant, enterprise-grade environments where agent-tool interactions must be trusted, traceable and controlled.

How CTEM Enhances MCP Security

Continuous threat exposure management, a framework developed by Gartner, provides a structured approach to enhancing security in MCP-enabled ecosystems.

CTEM provides a full-lifecycle model to address dynamic, evolving AI agent environments.

CTEM Phases And Their Applications To The MCP Ecosystem

• Scoping: Prioritize critical workflows, sensitive data paths, admin tool accesses and external integrations.

• Discovery: Map all MCP servers, clients, toolchains and live agent workflows.

• Prioritization: Risk-rank based on exploitability, sensitivity and business impact.

• Validation: Simulate real-world attacks across MCP flows to expose vulnerabilities before adversaries do.

• Mobilization: Align AI developers, security teams and leadership on shared risk strategies and mitigation plans.

Practical Recommendations For Organizations

For Security Leaders

From day one, organizations should implement CTEM, treating MCP flows as dynamic assets that require continuous validation. It’s also essential to advocate for standardized authentication and authorization protocols across the MCP ecosystem. To support these efforts, invest in real-time monitoring and observability to track and secure all agent-tool interactions.

For Developers

A secure-by-design approach is critical; every MCP client and server should include strong authentication, input validation and least privilege access controls. To further reduce risk, limit connections to only essential tools, harden server integrations and apply patch management. Equally important is educating teams on emerging AI and MCP security risks to ensure organization-wide awareness and preparedness.

Future Trends To Watch

Key trends to watch include the rise of MCP marketplaces for secure, standardized discovery; the evolution of security-focused MCP gateways managing traffic and permissions; the emergence of agent-first architectures with built-in security; and growing regulatory focus on compliance and logging for AI-driven integrations.

Building A Secure AI Future Now

The model context protocol has the potential to reshape how AI models operate, enabling powerful new agent-native experiences. But without continuous, adaptive cybersecurity strategies like CTEM, it risks creating a sprawling, exploitable web of interconnected vulnerabilities.

Innovation must be fueled by security from the ground up. Adopting MCP responsibly demands that organizations prioritize threat exposure management alongside functionality, not after security failures occur.

The future of AI is autonomous, integrated and dynamic. It must be secure, resilient and trusted. The AI revolution will not wait for security to catch up; it is our job to build it continuously, proactively and strategically.

Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?