arXiv:2605. 08442v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Persistent memory attacks against LLM agents achieve high attack success rates against open-source models.
arXiv:2605. 08442v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We discover that prompt-injection success and tool-execution success are separable safety properties: defenses that block injection do not necessarily block execution, and vice versa.
arXiv:2606. 12703v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) agents increasingly run with persistent memory that accumulates across user sessions.
arXiv:2607. 19430v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent LLM applications chain a planner, worker agents, a verifier, and a synthesizer, and every hop between agents is an unmonitored channel through which an adversary can smuggle instructions.
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.
arXiv:2603. 23171v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Providers monitor deployed large language models (LLMs) to detect misuse that they cannot prevent.
arXiv:2609. 04875v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-running LLM agents are stateful: beyond the transcript they accrete compressed summaries, plaintext memory, pending tool plans, and, under every serving API, a KV cache.
arXiv:2607. 27080v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Memory systems allow agents to retain and reuse information from past interactions, but they can also let malicious content persist.
arXiv:2607. 26849v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are deployed in high-stakes domains, adversaries may poison training data to implant backdoors: hidden triggers that covertly manipulate model behavior at inference time.
The paper introduces a provenance‑aware execution graph for long‑horizon LLM agents, defining influence distance (DI) as the shortest structural path from an untrusted source to a sensitive action. Compared to the traditional sequence distance (DT), DI is always less than or equal to DT, revealing a median gap of nine hops in 454 injection–sink pairs across multiple models and datasets. The study shows that most pairs exhibit a non‑zero gap, and a deterministic DI‑based gate can block attacks missed by a sequence‑only gate without extra benign blocking.
arXiv:2607. 22962v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents that operate over many turns accumulate facts in an external memory store and reuse them as premises for downstream reasoning.
arXiv:2608. 03372v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI systems rewrite information constantly: conversations become stored memories, documents become answers.