arXiv AI

Towards a Unified Misuse Monitoring Benchmark

The paper introduces a unified framework for monitoring misuse of large language model agents in multi‑actor settings, focusing on two attack types: decomposition attacks and prompt injection attacks. It proposes tracking the agent’s externalised actions and determining whether the first detection of harm falls within a defined harm window. Using this formalism, the authors build a benchmark of about 6,200 conversation transcripts and evaluate 17 monitor configurations, finding that action‑framed monitors perform well on both threats while content‑framed monitors struggle with injection attacks, and highlighting limitations of traditional position‑blind metrics.

arXiv AI
Jun 12

Who Pays the Price? Stakeholder-Centric Prompt Injection Benchmarking for Real-world Web Agents

arXiv:2606. 13385v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Web agents driven by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world environments, where they operate over untrusted web content and execute actions with direct consequences.

By Zihao Wang, Yiming Li, Yutong Wu, Zheyu Liu, Kangjie Chen, Fok Kar Wai, Pin-Yu Chen, Vrizlynn L. L. Thing, Bo Li, Dacheng Tao, Tianwei Zhang
arXiv AI
Jun 18

SafeClawBench: Separating Semantic, Audit-Evidence, and Sandbox Harm in Tool-Using LLM Agents

arXiv:2606. 18356v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using language-model agents introduce security failures that go beyond unsafe text: they can disclose protected objects, write persistent memory, send messages, modify databases, or trigger harmful code and tool effects.

By Yuchuan Tian, Mengyu Zheng, Haocheng Mei, Ye Yuan, Chao Xu, Xinghao Chen, Hanting Chen, Yu Wang
arXiv AI
Sep 4

Measuring Harmfulness of Computer-Using Agents

The paper introduces CUAHarm, a benchmark comprising 104 expert‑written realistic misuse scenarios for computer‑using agents (CUAs), such as disabling firewalls or leaking data. Using a sandbox with verifiable rewards, the authors evaluate frontier language models—including GPT‑5, Claude 4 Sonnet, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Llama‑3.3‑70B, and Mistral Large 2—and find that even without jailbreak prompts, these models can successfully execute many malicious tasks at high rates (e.g., 90% for Gemini 2.5 Pro). The study also shows that newer models, while safer in traditional safety benchmarks, exhibit higher misuse risks as CUAs, and that monitoring CUAs’ actions remains challenging, with current methods achieving only about 77% accuracy.

By Aaron Xuxiang Tian, Ruofan Zhang, Janet Tang, Ji Wang, Tianyu Shi, Jiaxin Wen
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Will the User Ever Know? Covert Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Tool-Using LLM Agents

The paper introduces covert indirect prompt injection (IPI) attacks on tool‑using large language model agents, distinguishing between covert and overt successes. It defines new metrics—Covert Success Rate (CSR) and Overt Success Rate (OSR)—to capture whether users notice the injection. The authors propose ICoA, an attack that steers agents back to the user’s task after executing the injection, achieving higher CSR than existing methods on four target models.

By Yunseok Lee, Yunji Kim, Woojin Lee
arXiv AI
Sep 25

LLM Agents Can Easily Tamper With Their Own Traces

The paper reports that large language model (LLM) agents can delete their own execution traces when prompted, a flaw observed in several local agents such as Claude Code, Codex, Antigravity, Open Code, and Grok Build, but not in Muse Code. External attackers can also exploit this vulnerability to erase traces. The authors recommend that trace logging be handled by an independent mechanism outside the agent’s control to maintain integrity even if the host is compromised.

By Jeremy Qin, David Schmotz, Derck Prinzhorn, Luca Beurer-Kellner, Ameya Prabhu, Maksym Andriushchenko