Add roadmap for MCPProxy-Go 1-Year Plan (2025-2026) focusing on security, compliance, and enterprise readiness. Outline key priorities, phases, deliverables, and success metrics to enhance project direction and community engagement.

Author: Dumbris

ROADMAP.md

@@ -0,0 +1,337 @@
+# MCPProxy-Go 1-Year Roadmap (2025-2026)
+
+> **Vision**: Transform mcpproxy-go into the premier secure, enterprise-ready MCP proxy with comprehensive tool poisoning defense, OAuth 2.1 compliance, and advanced security monitoring capabilities.
+
+## Executive Summary
+
+Based on MCP 2025.06 specification requirements and emerging security research, this roadmap prioritizes **security-first development** to address critical vulnerabilities in the MCP ecosystem while maintaining usability and performance. The focus areas align with [Draft MCP Specification Security Requirements](https://spec.modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/draft/basic/security_best_practices) and recent security research on [Tool Poisoning Attacks](https://invariantlabs.ai/blog/mcp-security-notification-tool-poisoning-attacks).
+
+### Key Priorities
+1. **Security First**: Implement RFC 8707 compliance, tool poisoning defense, and advanced security monitoring
+2. **MCP 2025.06 Compliance**: Full support for structured output, elicitation, and protocol versioning
+3. **Enterprise Readiness**: OAuth 2.1, audit trails, RBAC, and deployment flexibility
+4. **Developer Experience**: Security-aware tooling, comprehensive documentation, and seamless integration
+
+---
+
+## 🗓️ Timeline Overview
+
+| Phase | Timeline | Focus | Key Deliverables |
+|-------|----------|-------|------------------|
+| **Q2 2025** | Apr-Jun | Security Foundation | OAuth 2.1/RFC 8707, Tool Manifest Signing |
+| **Q3 2025** | Jul-Sep | MCP 2025.06 Compliance | Structured Output, Elicitation, Protocol Versioning |
+| **Q4 2025** | Oct-Dec | Advanced Security | TPA Scanning, Cross-Server Isolation, Trust Dashboard |
+| **Q1 2026** | Jan-Mar | Enterprise Features | RBAC, Audit Systems, Performance Optimization |
+
+---
+
+## 🛡️ Phase 1: Security Foundation (Q2 2025)
+
+> **Priority**: CRITICAL - Address fundamental security gaps before broader adoption
+
+### 1.1 OAuth 2.1 with Resource Indicators (RFC 8707) Compliance
+**Status**: ⚠️ REQUIRED by MCP 2025.06 specification  
+**Effort**: High | **Impact**: Very High | **Risk**: High
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Protected Resource Metadata Discovery** ([RFC 9728](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9728.html))
+  - Implement `/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource` endpoint
+  - Support authorization server discovery via `authorization_servers` property
+  - Enable separation of authorization server and resource server roles
+
+- [ ] **Resource Indicator Token Validation**
+  - Implement RFC 8707 resource parameter handling
+  - Validate audience-restricted tokens with proper `aud` claims
+  - Reject tokens without correct resource URI scoping
+
+- [ ] **Enhanced Token Security**
+  - Implement token audience restriction to prevent cross-resource token usage
+  - Add support for JWT access tokens (RFC 9068) for stateless validation
+  - Token lifetime management with configurable expiration policies
+
+**Justification**: [MCP Authorization specification](https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/basic/authorization) makes OAuth 2.1 REQUIRED for HTTP transports. Enterprise security demands RFC 8707 compliance to prevent confused deputy attacks and ensure proper token scoping.
+
+**Dependencies**: Update to `mark3labs/mcp-go v0.33.0+` (when available with RFC 8707 support)
+
+### 1.2 Signed Tool Manifests & Integrity Verification
+**Status**: 🚨 HIGH PRIORITY - Addresses [Tool Poisoning Attacks](https://blog.trailofbits.com/2025/04/21/jumping-the-line-how-mcp-servers-can-attack-you-before-you-ever-use-them/)  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: High | **Risk**: Medium
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Cryptographic Manifest Signing**
+  - Implement Ed25519 signature verification for tool definitions
+  - Support for multiple signing authorities and key rotation
+  - Integration with existing cache system for signed manifest storage
+
+- [ ] **Tool Definition Integrity Checks**
+  - Hash-based verification of tool schemas at load time
+  - Detect unauthorized modifications to tool descriptions
+  - Block execution of tampered tool definitions
+
+- [ ] **Manifest Pinning System**
+  - Version-locked tool definitions to prevent "rug pull" attacks
+  - Configurable update policies (manual/automatic/scheduled)
+  - Rollback capabilities for problematic updates
+
+**Justification**: Research by [Trail of Bits](https://blog.trailofbits.com/2025/04/21/jumping-the-line-how-mcp-servers-can-attack-you-before-you-ever-use-them/) and [Invariant Labs](https://invariantlabs.ai/blog/mcp-security-notification-tool-poisoning-attacks) demonstrates critical "line jumping" vulnerabilities where malicious tool descriptions can execute attacks before any tool invocation.
+
+### 1.3 MCP Protocol Version Headers
+**Status**: ⚡ REQUIRED by MCP 2025.06  
+**Effort**: Low | **Impact**: Medium | **Risk**: Low
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Protocol Version Negotiation**
+  - Implement `MCP-Protocol-Version` header support per [PR #548](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol/pull/548)
+  - Version compatibility matrix and feature detection
+  - Graceful fallback for older protocol versions
+
+**Expected Completion**: End of Q2 2025
+
+---
+
+## 🔧 Phase 2: MCP 2025.06 Compliance (Q3 2025)
+
+> **Priority**: HIGH - Full compliance with latest MCP specification
+
+### 2.1 Structured Tool Output Support
+**Status**: ⚡ NEW in MCP 2025.06  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: High | **Risk**: Medium
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Enhanced Schema Cache System**
+  - Support for JSON Schema validation of tool outputs
+  - Type-safe result parsing and validation
+  - Integration with existing BleveDB indexing system
+
+- [ ] **Security-Aware Result Processing**
+  - Sanitization of structured outputs before UI rendering
+  - Field-level security annotations (safe/unsafe content marking)
+  - Configurable output filtering policies
+
+- [ ] **UI Enhancements for Structured Data**
+  - Rich rendering of JSON-typed results in system tray
+  - Security indicators for potentially unsafe fields
+  - Export capabilities for structured data
+
+**Justification**: [MCP 2025.06 specification](https://spec.modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-06-18/) adds structured tool output as a core feature enabling richer UIs and safer parsing.
+
+### 2.2 Elicitation Support Implementation
+**Status**: ⚡ NEW in MCP 2025.06  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: Medium | **Risk**: Medium
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **User Information Elicitation Handler**
+  - Implement server-initiated user data requests
+  - Integration with quarantine system for elicitation review
+  - Configurable privacy policies for data sharing
+
+- [ ] **Elicitation Security Gateway**
+  - Human-in-the-loop approval for sensitive elicitation requests
+  - Data classification and handling policies
+  - Audit logging for all elicitation activities
+
+**Justification**: Elicitation enables servers to request additional user context but requires careful security controls to prevent unauthorized data collection.
+
+### 2.3 Enhanced Quarantine System
+**Status**: 🔄 ENHANCEMENT of existing system  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: High | **Risk**: Low
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Advanced Tool Analysis Engine**
+  - Static analysis of tool descriptions for suspicious patterns
+  - Integration with threat intelligence feeds
+  - ML-based anomaly detection for tool behavior
+
+- [ ] **Interactive Security Review**
+  - Web-based quarantine review interface
+  - Risk scoring and recommendation system
+  - Batch approval workflows for trusted patterns
+
+**Expected Completion**: End of Q3 2025
+
+---
+
+## 🔒 Phase 3: Advanced Security Features (Q4 2025)
+
+> **Priority**: HIGH - Advanced threat protection and enterprise security
+
+### 3.1 Tool Poisoning Attack (TPA) Detection & Prevention
+**Status**: 🚨 CRITICAL - Based on [latest security research](https://arxiv.org/html/2504.03767v2)  
+**Effort**: High | **Impact**: Very High | **Risk**: Medium
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Advanced TPA Scanner**
+  - LLM-based tool description analysis for hidden instructions
+  - Pattern matching for common attack vectors ("send data to", "execute", etc.)
+  - Integration with McpSafetyScanner methodologies
+
+- [ ] **Real-time Tool Monitoring**
+  - Behavioral analysis of tool execution patterns
+  - Anomaly detection for unexpected tool combinations
+  - Automatic quarantine of suspicious tool chains
+
+- [ ] **Tool Description Sanitization**
+  - Strip potentially malicious instructions from tool metadata
+  - Whitelist-based instruction filtering
+  - User notification for sanitized content
+
+**Justification**: Recent research demonstrates critical vulnerabilities where [malicious tool descriptions can execute attacks](https://noailabs.medium.com/mcp-security-issues-emerging-threats-in-2025-7460a8164030) without explicit tool invocation. TPA prevention is essential for production deployments.
+
+### 3.2 Cross-Server Isolation & Tool Shadowing Prevention
+**Status**: 🔴 HIGH RISK - Prevents server-to-server attacks  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: High | **Risk**: Medium
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Server Namespace Isolation**
+  - Prevent cross-server tool name collisions
+  - Implement server-scoped tool namespacing
+  - Conflict detection and resolution policies
+
+- [ ] **Tool Shadowing Detection**
+  - Monitor for duplicate tool names across servers
+  - Alert on potential tool impersonation attempts
+  - Configurable precedence rules for tool conflicts
+
+- [ ] **Server Communication Firewall**
+  - Block unauthorized inter-server communication
+  - Audit and log all cross-server interaction attempts
+  - Configurable server trust relationships
+
+**Justification**: [Invariant Labs research](https://invariantlabs.ai/blog/mcp-security-notification-tool-poisoning-attacks) shows attackers can use malicious servers to shadow legitimate tools and redirect sensitive operations.
+
+### 3.3 Comprehensive Security Dashboard
+**Status**: 🎯 HIGH IMPACT - Security visibility and control  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: High | **Risk**: Low
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Real-time Threat Monitoring**
+  - Security event timeline and alerting
+  - Server trust status indicators
+  - Tool execution audit trails
+
+- [ ] **Risk Assessment Interface**
+  - Server security scoring and recommendations
+  - Tool risk categorization (safe/caution/dangerous)
+  - Compliance status dashboard
+
+- [ ] **Incident Response Tools**
+  - Automated quarantine triggers
+  - Emergency server disconnection capabilities
+  - Forensic data export and analysis tools
+
+**Expected Completion**: End of Q4 2025
+
+---
+
+## 🏢 Phase 4: Enterprise Features & Optimization (Q1 2026)
+
+> **Priority**: MEDIUM - Production readiness and enterprise adoption
+
+### 4.1 Role-Based Access Control (RBAC)
+**Status**: 🎯 ENTERPRISE REQUIREMENT  
+**Effort**: High | **Impact**: High | **Risk**: Medium
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Granular Permission System**
+  - Per-tool access control policies
+  - Server-specific user permissions
+  - Integration with enterprise identity providers
+
+- [ ] **Policy Management Interface**
+  - Web-based RBAC configuration
+  - Group-based permission inheritance
+  - Audit trails for permission changes
+
+### 4.2 Advanced Audit & Compliance
+**Status**: 🎯 ENTERPRISE REQUIREMENT  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: Medium | **Risk**: Low
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Comprehensive Audit Logging**
+  - Structured logging with searchable metadata
+  - Integration with SIEM systems (Splunk, ELK, etc.)
+  - Configurable retention and archival policies
+
+- [ ] **Compliance Reporting**
+  - SOC 2 Type II compliance artifacts
+  - GDPR data handling documentation
+  - Security assessment reports
+
+### 4.3 Performance & Scalability Optimization
+**Status**: 🔧 OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE  
+**Effort**: Medium | **Impact**: Medium | **Risk**: Low
+
+#### Deliverables
+- [ ] **Horizontal Scaling Support**
+  - Distributed cache with Redis/Valkey
+  - Load balancing for multiple proxy instances
+  - Session affinity and state management
+
+- [ ] **Performance Monitoring**
+  - Prometheus metrics export
+  - Tool execution performance tracking
+  - Resource utilization monitoring
+
+**Expected Completion**: End of Q1 2026
+
+---
+
+## 📊 Success Metrics & KPIs
+
+### Security Metrics
+- **Zero Critical Security Incidents**: No successful tool poisoning or data exfiltration attacks
+- **100% MCP 2025.06 Compliance**: Full implementation of required security features
+- **<5 second** mean time to security alert detection
+- **>99.9%** uptime with security monitoring active
+
+### Adoption Metrics
+- **500+ GitHub stars** by end of 2025
+- **50+ enterprise deployments** by Q1 2026
+- **Active community** of 20+ regular contributors
+
+### Performance Metrics
+- **<100ms** tool execution latency (95th percentile)
+- **10,000+ tools** indexed without performance degradation
+- **99.95%** availability for production deployments
+
+---
+
+## 🔗 Key Dependencies & Integration Points
+
+### External Dependencies
+- **mcp-go Framework**: Requires updates for RFC 8707 support
+- **Security Research**: Active monitoring of [Trail of Bits](https://blog.trailofbits.com/), [Invariant Labs](https://invariantlabs.ai/), and [OWASP GENAI](https://genai.owasp.org/) findings
+- **MCP Specification**: Track changes in [official MCP repo](https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/modelcontextprotocol)
+
+### Integration Targets
+- **Enterprise IdPs**: Auth0, Okta, Azure AD, Keycloak
+- **Monitoring Systems**: Prometheus, Grafana, ELK Stack
+- **Security Tools**: Integration with McpSafetyScanner, SIEM systems
+
+---
+
+## 🎯 Conclusion
+
+This roadmap positions mcpproxy-go as the leading secure MCP proxy solution by addressing critical security vulnerabilities while maintaining usability and performance. The security-first approach ensures enterprise adoption readiness while contributing to the broader MCP ecosystem security.
+
+The phased approach allows for rapid response to emerging threats while building a solid foundation for long-term growth and community adoption.
+
+---
+
+## 📚 References & Justification Sources
+
+1. [MCP 2025.06 Specification](https://spec.modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-06-18/)
+2. [MCP Authorization Specification](https://modelcontextprotocol.io/specification/2025-03-26/basic/authorization)
+3. [RFC 8707 - Resource Indicators for OAuth 2.0](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8707.html)
+4. [RFC 9728 - Protected Resource Metadata](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9728.html)
+5. [Tool Poisoning Research - Trail of Bits](https://blog.trailofbits.com/2025/04/21/jumping-the-line-how-mcp-servers-can-attack-you-before-you-ever-use-them/)
+6. [MCP Security Issues - Invariant Labs](https://invariantlabs.ai/blog/mcp-security-notification-tool-poisoning-attacks)
+7. [MCP Security 101 - Protect AI](https://protectai.com/blog/mcp-security-101)
+8. [Securing MCP - Block Engineering](https://block.github.io/goose/blog/2025/03/31/securing-mcp/)
+9. [OWASP GenAI Security Guidelines](https://genai.owasp.org/2025/04/22/securing-ais-new-frontier-the-power-of-open-collaboration-on-mcp-security/)
+10. [McpSafetyScanner Research](https://arxiv.org/html/2504.03767v2)
+
+---
+
+*Last Updated: April 2025*  
+*Next Review: Q2 2025*