AgentReadyHomeAgent Listing

← Asana MCP Server

Asana MCP Server — agentic threat model

7.4AIVSS 7.4 · High

The Asana MCP Server introduces significant agentic risk by granting LLMs write access to enterprise work management systems, making prompt-injection-driven task manipulation and data exfiltration highly plausible.

OWASP AIVSS score rationale

AIVSS = (CVSS_Base + AARS) × Mitigation_Factor, where AARS = (10 − CVSS_Base) × (Factor_Sum / 10) × ThM
CVSS base 7.5AARS uplift 1.21Factor sum 4.6/10Threat ×1.05Mitigation ×0.85
Autonomy of Action
0.60
Goal-Driven Planning
0.50
Self-Modification
0.10
Dynamic Tool Use
0.70
Persistent Memory
0.30
Contextual Awareness
0.60
Dynamic Identity
0.50
Multi-Agent Interactions
0.40
Non-Determinism
0.50
Opacity & Reflexivity
0.40

Scored with the canonical OWASP AIVSS formula (AIVSS calculator reference); agentic risk factors estimated from the agent’s described capabilities.

MAESTRO 7-layer threat model

Per-layer threats for this agent. Layers tagged “not certain from listing” are general, caveated commentary where the public description didn’t pin that layer.

L1 · Foundation Models⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — The hosted MCP server does not specify the underlying LLM; however, it is highly vulnerable to indirect prompt injection via malicious task descriptions or comments stored in Asana that the model processes.

L2 · Data Operations✓ mapped

The agent queries and updates workspace data, tasks, and projects. Data poisoning is a major threat, as malicious users can insert instructions into Asana tasks to manipulate the agent's behavior during RAG or search operations.

L3 · Agent Frameworks✓ mapped

The framework exposes powerful tools for creating, updating, and searching tasks. Insecure tool integration or lack of strict input validation on the client side could allow an LLM to execute unauthorized state changes in Asana.

L4 · Deployment & Infrastructure✓ mapped

The server is hosted at mcp.asana.com. While the infrastructure is managed by Asana, the primary threat is unauthorized access to the hosted endpoint or session hijacking of the active MCP connection.

L5 · Evaluation & Observability⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — There is no mention of built-in guardrails, transaction logging, or anomaly detection to monitor and block suspicious agent-initiated task modifications or bulk data exports.

L6 · Security & Compliance (cross-cutting)✓ mapped

The agent authenticates via OAuth, which provides a strong identity layer. However, the security posture depends heavily on whether the OAuth scopes are minimized and if user-consent flows are enforced for destructive actions.

L7 · Agent Ecosystem✓ mapped

As an MCP server, this agent is designed to be called by other host agents. This introduces cascading risks where a compromised orchestrator agent can abuse the Asana toolset to exfiltrate corporate data or disrupt workflows.

MAESTRO — the 7-layer agentic threat-modeling framework (Cloud Security Alliance / Ken Huang).