MCP TypeScript server SDK: Shared transport or server instances delivered one HTTP client's messages to another · CVE-2026-111770 · GitHub Advisory Database · GitHub
Skip to content

MCP TypeScript server SDK: Shared transport or server instances delivered one HTTP client's messages to another

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Oct 15, 2026 in modelcontextprotocol/typescript-sdk • Updated Oct 20, 2026

Package

npm @modelcontextprotocol/server (npm)

Affected versions

>= 2.0.0, < 2.3.0

Patched versions

2.3.0

Description

Summary

In affected versions, an MCP server reached over HTTP could deliver one client's responses and notifications to another client. This happened when clients shared one stateless transport, or one McpServer or Server instance.

Messages were matched to a connection by JSON-RPC id alone. SDK clients number requests from 0, so ids collide in normal use.

Am I affected?

Yes, if more than one client can reach your HTTP endpoint and your code creates the transport or the server once at startup, instead of once per request or per session. Until this release, the README examples of @modelcontextprotocol/hono, express, fastify and node showed that pattern.

Affected versions: @modelcontextprotocol/server 2.0.0 through 2.2.0.

Not affected:

  • createMcpHandler() with a factory that builds a new server on every call
  • stdio servers
  • @modelcontextprotocol/sdk 1.26.0 and later

Fix

Upgrade to @modelcontextprotocol/server 2.3.0 or later.

You also need to change your code. The SDK now refuses to be shared, so an affected app fails requests after upgrading: a second connect() rejects with ALREADY_CONNECTED, and a stateless transport rejects its second request.

Change to one of these:

  • createMcpHandler(): pass a factory that builds a new McpServer on every call.
  • Per request: build a new McpServer and a new transport inside the request handler.
  • Per session: set sessionIdGenerator and keep one McpServer and one transport per session.

If you cannot upgrade yet, the same change fixes affected versions.

References

Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Oct 20, 2026
Reviewed Oct 20, 2026
Last updated Oct 20, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
Low
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:H

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-111770

GHSA ID

GHSA-jm63-cq47-j5jp

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.