
Businessmcp
com.businessmcp由 businessmcp.com 發布官方發布者v3.0.0更新於 Oct 24, 2026
Your whole business as one MCP server: analytics, CRM, SEO, ads, revenue. Scoped per data class.
概覽
受 OAuth 保護的遠端 MCP 端點,把企業的分析、CRM、SEO、廣告與營收資料當成單一伺服器提供,並依資料類別劃分權限範圍。
- 可以做什麼
- 未公布工具清單,能力只能從描述得知:助理可透過單一託管端點存取分析、CRM、SEO、廣告與營收等業務資料。
- 存取依資料類別劃分範圍,助理能看到什麼取決於連線時授予的權限。
- 廠商隨附的 README 介紹的是閘道強化工具(URL/SSRF 檢查、上游錯誤分類、工具名稱命名空間、傳輸回退),而非此託管伺服器的工具。
- 適用情境
- 當你希望助理透過一個託管 MCP 連線查詢多個業務系統(分析、CRM、SEO、廣告、營收),而不想分別串接,且能接受廠商託管的 OAuth 服務時,可以考慮使用。
- 執行需求
- 需要廠商網域上的遠端 streamable HTTP 端點,且必須使用 OAuth 驗證。未宣告環境變數或請求標頭。README 中另外的 npm 工具套件需要 Node.js,其傳輸輔助模組還需以對等相依方式安裝 MCP 用戶端套件。
安裝
在 SourceWeft 中
- 開啟 儀表板中的 Businessmcp,將其新增到工作區。
- 連接 所需的 憑證。它們會被私密儲存,絕不會在公開頁面上展示。
- 為需要使用其工具的對話啟用該服務。
Web executable,透過 Streamable HTTP。 遠端服務在工作區中設定後即可從網頁執行環境執行。
交給代理程式安裝
把這段提示詞貼上到 Claude Code、Codex、Cursor 等代理程式,或 SourceWeft 對話中。代理程式會讀取該伺服器的安裝指南,先向你展示發布者、端點和登入方式,經你同意後再把它新增到你的客戶端。金鑰不會寫進任何命令。
閱讀 https://sourceweft.com/mcp/com.businessmcp%2Fbusinessmcp/install.md,並按其中說明把這個 MCP 伺服器接入我的客戶端。修改任何設定之前,先告訴我它的發布者、端點和登入方式,等我確認。不要把 API 金鑰寫進命令或我會提交的檔案;問我金鑰應從哪裡取得。其他 MCP 客戶端
把它新增到你客戶端的 mcpServers 設定中。 客戶端會在首次連接時完成 OAuth 登入。
{
"mcpServers": {
"businessmcp": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://businessmcp.com/api/mcp"
}
}
}README
mcp-gateway
Hardening utilities for an MCP gateway — a server that fronts other people's MCP servers.
These are extracted from BusinessMCP's production gateway, which lets a workspace connect third-party MCP servers and re-expose them through one governed endpoint. Fronting someone else's server means fetching a URL a user supplied, on your infrastructure, and that has a small number of ways to go badly wrong. This is what we run.
MIT. No dependencies for the two core modules — two Node builtins and nothing else.
1. The SSRF guard, and the bypass that survived a passing test suite
A gateway takes a URL from a user and fetches it. Without a guard that is a direct path to
http://169.254.169.254/ and your cloud credentials.
The obvious implementation checks the host against a list of reserved ranges. Ours did, including IPv4-mapped IPv6:
That regex never fired in production. The WHATWG URL parser — new URL(), what every caller
actually uses — normalizes IPv6 hosts to their canonical form, and the canonical form of an
IPv4-mapped address is hex:
The dotted spelling the regex matched is a shape no caller can produce. The unit test passed because it called the guard with the dotted string directly. It was green, and it was meaningless: the guard was only ever exercised through an input the real code path could not generate.
Every one of these reached the fetch:
Adding more prefixes to the list is not the fix. IPv6 has several mechanisms that embed an IPv4
address, and matching text means playing whack-a-mole against a normalizer you do not control. This
guard decodes the address to its eight 16-bit groups and checks numerically, unwrapping every
embedding it knows (::ffff: mapped, :: compatible, 64:ff9b:: NAT64, 2002:: 6to4) and
recursing into the inner IPv4. Undecodable input fails closed — an address you cannot parse is
one you cannot vouch for.
isPublicHttpUrl resolves the hostname and requires every returned address to be public, which
is a best-effort DNS-rebinding defence. It is not a complete one: a rebind between this check and the
socket connect is a real TOCTOU window, and closing it means pinning the resolved IP into the
connection. We accept that residual risk and think you should know about it rather than discover it.
There is a second trap this does not solve for you. Validating a host once and then calling
fetch(url, { redirect: 'follow' }) is a bypass: the server 302s to http://127.0.0.1/ and the
follow is never checked. Follow redirects manually and re-validate every hop.
2. Classify upstream failures — never swallow them
The version of this code that shipped first wrapped every upstream call in catch {} and dropped
the server from the tool list. Auth failure, unsupported transport, timeout, blocked host and
"server is fine, returned nothing" were indistinguishable — which is to say invisible. Users saw
tools silently missing, with no explanation anywhere in the product.
The reason is also what makes a retry decision honest: only a handshake-shaped failure is worth retrying on another transport. An auth rejection fails identically either way.
3. Namespace tool names without collisions
Aggregating N servers means prefixing their tools. MCP caps names at 64 characters, so prefixing plus truncation can map two different upstream tools to the same string — and then a lookup by name dispatches the call to the wrong server.
When truncation is needed a short hash of the full name is appended, so two long names stay distinct.
4. Transport fallback
MCP's 2026-07-28 revision dropped legacy HTTP+SSE for servers, but plenty of servers you connect
to still only speak it. withUpstream tries streamable HTTP, falls back to SSE, and tells you
which worked so you can persist it and skip the probe next time.
Requires @modelcontextprotocol/client as a peer dependency. The other modules do not.
Honest limits
- Utilities, not a framework. There is no gateway here — no aggregation, no auth, no policy layer. Those are meaningfully coupled to how you store connections, and a fake abstraction over that would be worse than none.
- No external audit. This is what we run in production. That is a reason to take it seriously and not a substitute for review.
- The aggregation and inspection layers are deliberately not included, partly because they are coupled to our database and partly because they have no test coverage. Everything shipped here is from the tested side.
- DNS-rebinding TOCTOU is open, as described above.
Development
This package is generated from the BusinessMCP monorepo, where these modules are in active production use. Fixes should go there and be regenerated — a patch applied only here would be overwritten, and two hand-maintained copies of a security guard is the exact failure that produced the bypass in section 1.
Issues and reports are welcome here regardless.
來源:README.md,提交 0cb0536
工具
0版本歷史
1- v3.0.0最新Sep 18, 2026
評分
已滿足適用檢查項的 85%
該評分衡量此收錄條目的完整程度,依據註冊中心條目、端點與公開來源計算得出。它不是對伺服器本身的評價,也不表示伺服器安全或目前可用:可連通性是帶日期的檢查結果,評分也不包含安裝量或使用者評價。
- 近 30 天內可連通必需25 分
- 已宣告認證方式必需10 分
- 已列出工具15 分
請讓伺服器在無憑證時回應 tools/list,或發布可在沙箱中無憑證啟動的軟體包。
- 描述必需15 分
- 圖示10 分
- 文件15 分
- 授權條款10 分