Model Context Protocol (MCP) Security and Tenancy Boundaries

Authors

  • Rohit Reddy Gaddam Sr. Site Reliability Engineer. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9416.IJAIBDCMS-V5I1P118

Keywords:

Model Context Protocol, Tenancy Boundaries, AI Security, Context Isolation, Multi-Tenancy, Data Leakage, Access Control, Zero-Trust, Contextual Ai, Confidential Computing

Abstract

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is the mainframe that can control a multitude of contextual interactions in multi-tenant AI as well as cloud scenarios. In such conditions, users or organizations may use the same computational and data resources. AI systems that run on common infrastructures are calling for the securing of contextual data exchanges between tenants and models as a very serious issue. By introducing standard channels, MCP solves this problem for models in order to have access to, comprehend, and use tenant-specific contexts without violating isolation boundaries. Nevertheless, keeping contextual cues tenant-confined so as not to allow data leakage, inference crossover, and unauthorized model memory persistence necessitates very strong and strict boundary control. Establishing clear tenancy boundaries goes a long way in protecting sensitive metadata, prompts, and dynamic session states that are crossing AI-driven workflows. The paper investigates the security of the MCP architecture by first looking at its core principles and the risks it faces, including implicit data propagation and model-based context drift. A possible methodology drafts in the MCP framework the use of local encryption, dynamic policy enforcement, and tenant-aware context tagging to mitigate the risks. The work significantly achieved better containment levels and fewer cross-tenant incidents in adversarial simulations, as shown by the experiments carried out. The findings emphasize the need for integrating security and tenancy-awareness into the model context layer itself rather than depending externally on access control mechanisms. In the end, this research offers a viable route to companies that are willing to implement secure multi-tenant AI systems where contextual intelligence is free to develop without the risk of privacy or compliance infringements.

References

1. Niemelä, Niklas. "Implementing a maintainable and secure tenancy model." (2023).

2. Guo, Chang Jie, et al. "A framework for native multi-tenancy application development and management." The 9th IEEE International Conference on E-Commerce Technology and The 4th IEEE International Conference on Enterprise Computing, E-Commerce and E-Services (CEC-EEE 2007). IEEE, 2007.

3. Pasham, Sai Dikshit. "Graph-Based Models for Multi-Tenant Security in Cloud Computing." International Journal of Modern Computing 4.1 (2021): 1-28.

4. Jasti, Amarnath, et al. "Security in multi-tenancy cloud." 44th Annual 2010 IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology. IEEE, 2010.

5. Almorsy, Mohamed, John Grundy, and Ingo Müller. "An analysis of the cloud computing security problem." arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.01107 (2016).

6. Guntupalli, Bhavitha. "Asynchronous Programming in Java/Python: A Developer’s Guide." International Journal of Emerging Research in Engineering and Technology 3.2 (2022): 70-78.

7. AlJahdali, Hussain, et al. "Multi-tenancy in cloud computing." 2014 IEEE 8th international symposium on service oriented system engineering. IEEE, 2014.

8. Zhang, Yinqian, et al. "Cross-tenant side-channel attacks in PaaS clouds." Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 2014.

9. Parakala, Adityamallikarjunkumar. "Citizen-Facing Automation: Chatbots and Self-Service in Public Services." International Journal of AI, BigData, Computational and Management Studies 4.4 (2023): 108-118.

10. Behl, Akhil, and Kanika Behl. "An analysis of cloud computing security issues." 2012 world congress on information and communication technologies. IEEE, 2012.

11. Gonzales, Dan, et al. "Cloud-trustA security assessment model for infrastructure as a service (IaaS) clouds." IEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing 5.3 (2015): 523-536.

12. Rosen, Eva, Philip ME Garboden, and Jennifer E. Cossyleon. "Racial discrimination in housing: How landlords use algorithms and home visits to screen tenants." American Sociological Review 86.5 (2021): 787-822.

13. Guntupalli, Bhavitha. "Data Lake Vs. Data Warehouse: Choosing the Right Architecture." International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, Data Science, and Machine Learning 4.4 (2023): 54-64.

14. Pearson, Siani. "Privacy, security and trust in cloud computing." Privacy and security for cloud computing. London: Springer London, 2012. 3-42.

15. Shostack, Adam. Threat modeling: Designing for security. John wiley & sons, 2014.

16. Sengupta, Shubhashis, Vikrant Kaulgud, and Vibhu Saujanya Sharma. "Cloud computing security--trends and research directions." 2011 IEEE world congress on services. IEEE, 2011.

17. Parakala, Adityamallikarjunkumar. "RPA+ AI→ Intelligent Process Automation (IPA)." International Journal of AI, BigData, Computational and Management Studies 4.3 (2023): 112-123.

18. Pearson, Siani, and Azzedine Benameur. "Privacy, security and trust issues arising from cloud computing." 2010 IEEE Second International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science. IEEE, 2010.

19. Mordecai, Yaniv. "Model‐based protocol specification." Systems Engineering 22.2 (2019): 188-210.

Downloads

Published

2024-03-30

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

1.
Gaddam RR. Model Context Protocol (MCP) Security and Tenancy Boundaries. IJAIBDCMS [Internet]. 2024 Mar. 30 [cited 2026 Mar. 15];5(1):178-8. Available from: https://ijaibdcms.org/index.php/ijaibdcms/article/view/434