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:2607. 07474v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic red-teaming benchmarks report whether an injected agent was compromised as a single bit: the attack succeeded, or it did not.
By Harry Owiredu-Ashley
arXiv:2606. 14589v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM agent systems increasingly run as long-lived autonomous runtimes: scheduling jobs, calling tools, maintaining memory, and pushing results to humans.
By Wei Wu
arXiv:2608. 16852v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Regulatory compliance monitoring in deployed language models is increasingly implemented as a legal and audit control, checking model outputs against written rules spanning data protection, healthcare, financial regulation, and platform policy.
By Saisab Sadhu, Aadit Sengupta, Vinay Kumar Sankarapu, Pratinav Seth
arXiv:2606. 07054v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous LLM agents can pursue hidden malicious objectives through sequences of individually benign actions, making sabotage difficult to detect using standard trajectory-level monitoring.
By Vijitha Mittapalli, Shreyaa Jayant Dani, Satya Srujana Pilli, Snigdha Ansu, Mohammadreza Teymoorianfard, Franck Dernoncourt, Hongjie Chen, Yu Wang, Ryan A. Rossi, Nesreen K. Ahmed
arXiv:2607. 04292v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Ransomware has evolved into a complex, adaptive, and fast-moving adversary category in which static signatures and monolithic classifiers fail to generalise under concept drift, evasion, and behavioural polymorphism.
By Henry Kabuye, Biju Issac, Jeyamohan Neera
arXiv:2607. 19356v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents increasingly execute high-impact actions, making runtime safety monitoring essential.
By Elias Hossain, Md Mehedi Hasan Nipu, Tasfia Nuzhat Ornee, Rajib Rana, Niloofar Yousefi
arXiv:2608. 11295v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Open-weight LLM agents are vulnerable to backdoors installed during fine-tuning, which may be undetectable if the trigger conditions are never met during testing.
By Gabriel Huang, Abhay Puri, L\'eo Boisvert, Alexandre Drouin, Perouz Taslakian, Spandana Gella, Christopher Pal
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:2606. 10456v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI-control monitors score individual agent actions to detect misbehavior, but real harm can be distributed across many benign-looking steps, each individually below any per-step alarm.
By Zhang Qinqin, Gao Yuze
arXiv:2602. 16346v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: LLM-based agents execute real-world workflows via tools and memory.
By Nivya Talokar, Ayush K Tarun, Murari Mandal, Maksym Andriushchenko, Antoine Bosselut
arXiv:2607. 19449v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Evaluation frameworks for tool-augmented LLM agents focus overwhelmingly on capability metrics or explicit tool crashes, leaving silent infrastructure failures and HTTP 200 responses with empty, null, or malformed payloads largely unaudited.
By Aarushi Singh