JPMorganChase, Citi, and Bank of New York Mellon are now exposed to a vulnerability in the AI industry standard Anthropic declined to fix. Under federal banking guidance issued in 2023, these banks own the third-party cybersecurity risk in the AI infrastructure they are building — regardless of whether the underlying vendor ever patches the flaw.
That is the bind Anthropic's "expected behavior" response has created. MCP, the tool-sharing standard Anthropic released for connecting AI assistants to external systems, contains a design flaw that lets an attacker run unauthorized code on any system running a vulnerable implementation. OX Security proposed four patches. Anthropic declined all of them, saying the behavior is expected. The protocol has shipped in more than 150 million downloads, according to OX Security, which estimates up to 200,000 vulnerable instances in total, and has since produced more than ten high- and critical-severity vulnerabilities across the ecosystem.
OX Security demonstrated the risk on six live production platforms with paying customers before disclosing responsibly. Nine of eleven public MCP registries accepted OX's proof-of-concept malicious server without any security review required for listing, The Register reported. The architectural choice at the core of the flaw (a standard component called the STDIO adapter that launches external commands before validating whether it should) means the root cause lives in the protocol layer, not in any single implementation.
Banks are exposed not because they adopted an obscure framework, but because MCP is becoming the standard. JPMorganChase, Citi, and BNY are actively building agentic AI infrastructure — the category of software MCP is designed to enable, per American Banker reporting this week. The 2023 third-party risk management guidance means their regulators will hold them responsible for whatever vulnerabilities that infrastructure inherits.
Anthropic has committed up to $100 million to Glasswing, its initiative funding external researchers to find flaws in other companies' software, according to The Register. Its own protocol remains unchanged.
What to watch is whether any bank regulator issues explicit guidance on MCP adoption, or whether the industry's response stays in the category of internal security reviews and vendor questionnaires. The liability is documented. The question is who acts first.