Re:MCP's Disregard for 40 Years of RPC Best Practices
by throwawaymaths on Saturday August 09, 2025 @05:22PM
(#44850355)
no, it's not because the nature of llms mean that even if you fully validate your communications with the llm statistically anything can happen, so any usage/threat model must already take nasal demons into account.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:MCP's Disregard for 40 Years of RPC Best Practices
by stouset on Sunday August 10, 2025 @05:12AM
(#44853874)
Adding new and innovative layers of unsafety on top doesn’t invalidate the need for safety in lower layers. If anything it makes it more critical.
Re:MCP's Disregard for 40 Years of RPC Best Practices
by throwawaymaths on Monday August 11, 2025 @11:30AM
(#44865287)
you're missing the point. the point is, there is no need to make two layers out of one (i could be persuaded that it makes the coding easier)