arXiv:2607. 05479v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative AI (GenAI) systems store and process client data in three distinct ways: in the model's parameters through training and memorisation, in the context window during a live session, and in knowledge databases for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG).
arXiv:2606. 26627v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model agents increasingly query databases, search document collections, call external APIs, remember past interactions, and act on a user's behalf.
arXiv:2606. 17114v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI agents are increasingly being adopted in enterprise and personal settings with access to emails, databases, documents, and other tools where they can read, update, and disseminate sensitive information.
The paper discusses the "authorship hazard" in agentic dataspaces, where AI agents can draft and publish governance artifacts without human approval. It argues that agents should be treated as subjects of governance, not authors, and proposes mechanisms to enforce this, such as closing the authorization channel and treating drafting as an enforcement problem. Experiments show that unapproved agent drafts can reverse many authorization decisions, highlighting the need for robust review processes.
The paper discusses the trustworthiness of agentic AI systems built on large language models, highlighting new security and operational risks such as indirect prompt injection, memory contamination, and cross‑session data leakage. It categorizes failure modes, reviews mitigation strategies—including instruction hierarchies, context isolation, and constrained tool use—and introduces the Trustworthy Agent Development Lifecycle (TADL), a six‑phase framework for specification, design, training, evaluation, deployment, and monitoring. The authors note that TADL has not yet been empirically validated but offers a structured foundation for developing more secure and accountable agentic systems, and they call for improved benchmarks and future research priorities.
The paper introduces Governance-as-Code (GaC), a framework that translates the EU AI Act’s technical requirements into 43 machine‑checkable acceptance criteria across six compliance modules. GaC runs within a CI/CD pipeline, producing Article‑indexed audit evidence and providing actual Rego policy code. The authors validate GaC on two enterprise deployments, showing it reproduces manual audit findings—including three penalty‑triggering violations—while reducing audit labor by about 75%.
BodhiPromptShield is a policy‑aware mediation layer for LLM agent pipelines that detects sensitive text spans before they propagate, replacing them with typed placeholders, semantic abstractions, or secure tokens and restoring them only at authorized execution boundaries. In evaluations on AI4Privacy, PrivacyLens, and AgentDojo datasets, the system reduces identifier exposure to 7.4% and 1.8% respectively, and limits exact identifier leakage in final actions to 2.1–3.1%. While mediation preserves factual content according to automated metrics, human annotations show a significant drop in inferability from 100% to 24–53%, indicating the need for human validation of semantic‑leakage measures.
arXiv:2606. 05946v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The rights to rectification and erasure, as established under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), are central to protecting individuals' privacy.
arXiv:2607. 22953v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Modern AI systems bring societal risks such as mass surveillance, extreme concentrations of power, and loss of user autonomy---calling into question a model where third-parties collect and control massive amounts of user data.
The paper evaluates a task-based permission scoping architecture for AI agents, comparing a fine‑tuned RoBERTa‑large encoder to few‑shot Claude Haiku 4.5 on a 600‑prompt dataset. It shows the new system achieves comparable macro‑F1 (0.881 vs. 0.886) and higher precision (0.897 vs. 0.842), while reducing severity‑weighted residual risk from 1.12 to 0.63. The study also introduces an attack‑surface elimination metric, demonstrating that task‑granular control can close 84.4% of the severity‑weighted surface, far surpassing role‑based ceilings alone.
Two instruments of EU digital law place inference at their centre and mean different things by it. Article 3(1) of the AI Act uses the capability to infer constitutively: it is the central feature separating the regulated category from conventional software.
The paper proposes a tiered, reusable identity assurance model that separates assurance state from capability gates, allowing participants to disclose only what is necessary for each act. It introduces a typed entity taxonomy, a two‑axis coordinate system for assertion scope and source, and a time‑indexed jurisdiction attribute, with reliance recorded in bitemporal snapshots. The design is evaluated against existing flat‑verification and per‑credential models, addressing cross‑border reuse and data‑erasure versus evidentiary retention concerns.
arXiv:2606. 12415v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid global expansion of artificial intelligence regulation has generated, across multiple jurisdictions, a demand for legal expertise dedicated to AI that the market has addressed in a fragmented manner.