arXiv:2606. 26479v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent work (2024 to 2026) has converged on a strategy for defending tool-using LLM agents against indirect prompt injection: rather than training the model to refuse malicious instructions, enforce security outside the model with a deterministic policy that mediates the agent's actions.
By Praneeth Narisetty, Shiva Nagendra Babu Kore, Uday Kumar Reddy Kattamanchi, Jayaram Kumarapu
arXiv:2603. 13026v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Prompt injection poses serious security risks to real-world LLM applications, particularly autonomous agents.
By Chenlong Yin, Runpeng Geng, Yanting Wang, Jinyuan Jia
arXiv:2606. 15441v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Indirect prompt injection attacks hijack LLM-based agents by embedding malicious instructions in third-party data that the agent retrieves during task execution.
By Lipeng He, Yihan Wang, Jiawen Zhang, N. Asokan
arXiv:2607. 18063v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents process external content, exposing them to prompt injection and multi-turn manipulation.
By Devina Jain, David Hartmann, Chuan Li
arXiv:2606. 14517v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based guardrails have emerged as a highly effective defense against prompt injection and jailbreak attacks in autonomous agents.
By Yuguang Zhou, Xunguang Wang, Pingchuan Ma, Zhantong Xue, Zhaoyu Wang, Shuai Wang
arXiv:2606. 06529v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: An attacker that strategically chooses when to attack is much harder to catch than one that attacks indiscriminately.
By Catherine Ge-Wang, Tyler Crosse, Benjamin Hadad IV, Joachim Schaeffer, Ram Potham, Tyler Tracy
Indirect prompt injection attacks hijack LLM-based agents by embedding malicious instructions in third-party data that the agent retrieves during task execution. Existing defenses report near-zero attack success rate on static benchmarks, yet recent adaptive evaluations show that these results collapse once the attacker is allowed to optimize against the deployed defense.
arXiv:2606. 20408v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly proposed as supervisory components for safety-critical systems, yet their robustness under sustained, adaptive adversarial pressure remains poorly characterized.
By Hanwool Lee, Dasol Choi, Bokyeong Kim, Haon Park, Seung Geun Kim
arXiv:2604. 11943v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: An OS kernel that runs LLM inference internally can read the model's own next-token logit distribution before any text is generated, and act on it as a governance primitive.
By Daeyeon Son
arXiv:2606. 20408v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly proposed as supervisory components for safety-critical systems, yet their robustness under sustained, adaptive adversarial pressure remains poorly characterized.
By Hanwool Lee, Dasol Choi, Bokyeong Kim, Seung Geun Kim, Haon Park
arXiv:2607. 24893v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent LLM systems can be attacked by a payload that no single agent ever holds in full: a poisoned tool hides encrypted fragments in its observations, spreads them across several agents, and an external step reassembles and executes them after the run.
By Diego Fernandez Arias, Dev Prashant Mistry, Ren Wang, Yibo Hu
arXiv:2605. 08876v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents that execute tool-augmented, multi-step tasks, where latency is a critical factor for real-world applications.
By Xinyu Li, Ronghui Mu, Lin Li, Tianjin Huang, Gaojie Jin