arXiv:2607. 13718v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As AI agents gain prevalance, users are increasingly exposed to the risks such systems entail.
arXiv:2609.14003v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Personal AI agents built on large language models (LLMs) are increasingly given access to a user's private data and communications in order to provid...
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:2607. 05120v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI agents act on behalf of user prompts, consuming external data and taking actions based on the agent context.
The paper argues that privacy in personalized AI should be viewed as a system-level issue rather than just a model-level one. It identifies four interconnected privacy‑risk channels in personalized AI and proposes four system‑level requirements—interaction trajectories, internal information flows, indirect leakage, and the privacy‑utility trade‑off—for evaluating privacy. The authors call for these requirements to be systematically incorporated into privacy audits of personalized AI systems.
arXiv:2609.35937v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While prior work has documented privacy failures in LLM agents, it remains unclear how the presentation of privacy guidance influences their choice o...
The paper introduces AIM, a privacy‑aware memory framework that lets multi‑agent, multi‑user large language models manage both private and shared memory. AIM classifies data as private (user‑specific) or public (shared) and enforces index‑level access controls to protect sensitive information while enabling shared knowledge to improve coordination. The authors also present MUMBench, a new dataset for evaluating memory operations in multi‑user settings, and report high accuracy metrics for AIM on this benchmark.
The paper discusses the need to adapt incident reporting frameworks for AI agents, which are rapidly deployed and face unique security challenges. By comparing AI systems and agents and consulting 23 experts, the authors identify key reporting elements such as agent memory, autonomy levels, and tool usage. They also highlight open research questions, potential reporting weaknesses like data leakage, and outline privacy requirements for secure AI agent deployment.
arXiv:2512. 03238v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: High quality data is needed to unlock the full potential of AI for end users.
Personal AI agents that run on the user's local machine, such as OpenClaw, automate daily tasks including web search, email, and file management. Their access to computer resources, including the network, file system, and shell, exposes them to indirect prompt injection (IPI) attacks.
arXiv:2606. 00152v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents are rapidly advancing, autonomously invoking external tools to complete multi-step tasks for users.
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.