modelcontextprotocol / modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk

OAuth client sends client_id in token body under client_secret_basic (strict servers reject as multiple auth methods)

Open
#3,138 6 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

auth bug needs confirmation P1 v1 v2
Dominant language
Python
Stars
24.3k
Forks
4k
Avg merge
1d 1h
Merged PRs (30d)
31

Description

Initial Checks
  • I confirm that I'm using the latest version of MCP Python SDK
  • I confirm that I searched for my issue before opening this issue
Description

Under token_endpoint_auth_method = client_secret_basic, the OAuth client sends the client credentials in the HTTP Authorization: Basic header and also leaves client_id in the token-exchange POST body. Strict token endpoints reject this as two authentication methods in a single request.

OAuthClientProvider.prepare_token_auth (src/mcp/client/auth/oauth2.py) strips only client_secret from the body:

headers["Authorization"] = f"Basic {encoded_credentials}"
# Don't include client_secret in body for basic auth
data = {k: v for k, v in data.items() if k != "client_secret"}   # client_id remains in the body

Expected: with Basic auth, the request presents exactly one authentication method — the Authorization header — with no client credentials or identifier duplicated in the body.

Actual: client_id stays in the body.

Against Notion's MCP server (https://mcp.notion.com/mcp), where dynamic client registration returns token_endpoint_auth_method = client_secret_basic, the token exchange fails with:

Token exchange failed (400): "Client must not use multiple authentication methods"

There is also a secondary, misleading cascade (not the root cause): the failed first attempt starts a second OAuth flow that reuses the loopback callback port, and stale browser tabs redirect old approvals into it, surfacing OAuthFlowError: State parameter mismatch.

I want to frame this as an interop issue rather than a compliance accusation. RFC 6749 §2.3.1 presents the HTTP Basic header and body credentials as alternatives; sending only the header is unambiguously valid, removes the ambiguity, and loses no information (the client_id is already present, base64-encoded, in the Basic header). Stripping client_id from the body makes the SDK work against strict servers like Notion at no cost to lenient ones.

The one-line fix in the client_secret_basic branch:

data = {k: v for k, v in data.items() if k not in ("client_secret", "client_id")}

Note: the existing test test_basic_auth_token_exchange currently asserts client_id ... in content # client_id still in body — this behaviour was codified in the same commit that introduced Basic auth support (#1334), so the fix inverts that assertion.

Update: this is the CLIENT half — it depends on the server side (#1847)

The one-line client change cannot land alone. Body client_id is load-bearing on this SDK's own server side in three places, so a client that omits it fails against any server built on this SDK:

  1. ClientAuthenticator.authenticate_request (src/mcp/server/auth/middleware/client_auth.py) requires client_id in the body.
  2. TokenHandler's request models (AuthorizationCodeRequest / RefreshTokenRequest, src/mcp/server/auth/handlers/token.py) declare client_id: str as required — a missing value returns a Pydantic 400 invalid_request: client_id: Field required.
  3. The grant-ownership checks compare auth_code.client_id != token_request.client_id (and the refresh equivalent).

The matching server-side change is exactly what #1847 already implements: it makes body client_id optional, re-sources the ownership checks from the authenticated client_info.client_id, and reads client_id from the Basic header. So the two are complementary halves of one fix:

  • Client-only (this issue's change) → the SDK's own server rejects with Missing client_id. Verified.
  • Client change + #1847's server change → the previously-failing Basic-auth token exchange passes end-to-end. Verified locally by grafting #1847's server diff onto main and running the client + interaction OAuth suites (green). The only residual failures were #1847's own error-message test updates, which appear stranded by a tests/server/fastmcptests/server/mcpserver directory rename on main (i.e. #1847 looks like it needs a rebase) — unrelated to the client change.

Questions for maintainers:

  1. How would you like the client change sequenced against #1847 — folded into #1847, or as a linked follow-up PR that merges after it?
  2. Which branch(es) — main (v2), and/or a v1.x backport? The live breakage is on v1 (1.27.x) via Notion.

I'm happy to open the client-side PR (one-line change + updated tests) once there's buy-in and a preferred sequencing.

Example Code
# Any client using this SDK against Notion MCP, where dynamic registration
# returns token_endpoint_auth_method = client_secret_basic. For example via mcp2cli:
#   mcp2cli --mcp https://mcp.notion.com/mcp --oauth --list
#
# 1. Complete the browser authorization.
# 2. The token exchange returns:
#    Token exchange failed (400): "Client must not use multiple authentication methods"
Python & MCP Python SDK
Python 3.10
mcp: reproduced on 1.27.2 and 1.28.1; bug also present on main @ 3a6f299
Server: Notion MCP (https://mcp.notion.com/mcp), token_endpoint_auth_method = client_secret_basic

This report was prepared with AI assistance. I've reviewed the analysis and reproduced the failure myself, and can speak to the change directly.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with OAuthClientProvider.prepare_token_auth in src/mcp/client/auth/oauth2.py and test_basic_auth_token_exchange. Read ClientAuthenticator.authenticate_request in src/mcp/server/auth/middleware/client_auth.py, the request models in src/mcp/server/auth/handlers/token.py, and issue #1847; done requires the client and matching server changes to pass the OAuth interaction tests.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
api, authentication
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Quiet
Clarity
Clearly specified
Newbie friendliness
48/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.