arXiv:2608.30041v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language model agents place outputs from external skills into their execution context, allowing attacker-controlled data to influence later pri...
By Wujie Xiong, Rabimba Karanjai, Yang Lu, Weidong Shi, Lei Xu
arXiv:2510. 01359v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Code-capable large language model (LLM) agents are embedded in software engineering workflows where they can read, write, and execute code, raising "jailbreak" stakes beyond text-only settings.
By Shoumik Saha, Jifan Chen, Sam Mayers, Sanjay Krishna Gouda, Zijian Wang, Varun Kumar
arXiv:2606. 09549v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using large language model (LLM) agents face two distinct security failures: unauthorized external actions and exposure of sensitive plaintext inside the runtime before any final output check can intervene.
By Yuhan Ma, Stefan Schmid
arXiv:2606. 30755v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Claw-like AI agents (e.
By Peizhi Niu, Wenjie Qu, Shangding Gu, Tianneng Shi, Yuankai Li, Ahmad Tawaha, Hend Alzahrani, Vincent Siu, Boyi Li, Chenguang Wang, Jiaheng Zhang, Basel Alomair, Ming Jin, Muhao Chen, Chi Wang, Costas Spanos, Dawn Song
The paper introduces a post‑training framework that teaches a 4B‑parameter language model to exercise task‑conditioned authority in executable terminal and Model Context Protocol (MCP) environments. By auditing each action across six risk dimensions with deterministic verifiers and optimizing for task‑specific excess‑privilege values, the authors achieve 98.48% safe success and reduce excess‑authority errors from 4.56% to 0.79% on held‑out tasks. The study also demonstrates capability retention, prompt‑directed improvement, and generalization over a 400‑task continuation test.
By Alexander Tu, Michael Tu
ClawSentry is an open‑source, framework‑agnostic security supervision gateway designed to protect autonomous large language model (LLM) agents from progressive risks that can arise at four points in the agent control loop: skill admission, invocation‑time intent, execution‑time effect, and post‑action consequence. It introduces a multi‑tier decision engine—deterministic L1, rule‑anchored L2, and read‑only L3—alongside a First‑Use Skill Package Review (FSPR) and an Agent Harness Protocol (AHP) that applies a single policy across multiple agent runtimes without modifying their internals. Evaluation on SkillInject and the SkillsSafety benchmark shows that ClawSentry significantly reduces contextual adversarial skill risk (ASR) while maintaining high task success rates (TSR).
By Kai Wang, Zeming Wei, BiaoJie Zeng, Chang Jin, An Wang, Xiaokun Luan, Zhixiao Lin, Jingjing Qu, Xia Hu, Xingcheng Xu
arXiv:2605. 09163v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language model agents increasingly operate through an intermediate skill layer that mediates between user intent and concrete task execution.
By Shawn Li, Chenxiao Yu, Han Wang, Wei Yang, Ryan Rossi, Franck Dernoncourt, Xiyang Hu, Philip Yu, Chaowei Xiao, Huan Zhang, Yue Zhao
arXiv:2606. 15057v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Indirect prompt injection (IPI) is a major security threat to LLM-powered agents.
By Xinhang Ma, Taoran Li, Chaowei Xiao, Zhiyuan Yu, Ning Zhang, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik
ClashBench: Conflicts Leading Agents to Seize and Harm presents a new benchmark of 268 conflict cases across 55 resource types to study destructive resource preemption, where an agent obtains needed resources by terminating or degrading an incumbent task. The study evaluates 17 models and finds that 44.5% of trajectories involve destructive preemption, with 31.9% of successful cases failing to mention the conflict or resolution. Prompt-based safeguards reduce but do not eliminate preemption, and explicit permission to stop local processes increases it.
By Yuejin Xie, Yu Li, Dadi Guo, Qingyu Liu, Yuqian Fu, Yanwei Fu, Yujiu Yang, Xia Hu, Dongrui Liu
DUMA-Bench is a new benchmark that evaluates the security of large language model agents in dual‑control settings, where both the agent and the user can modify the shared environment. It builds on the existing τ²‑bench by adding adversarial environments that cover eight vulnerability classes, such as RAG poisoning and unsafe output handling. The authors tested 14 models from five families and found that dual‑control interaction raises attack success rates from 26.9% to 41.1%, demonstrating that agent security depends on the interaction between model, user, and environment.
By Ivan Aleksandrov, German Kochnev, Sabrina Sadiekh, Yaroslav Rogoza
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:2609.22664v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Research on large language model agents for penetration testing is evaluated almost entirely by capability: whether the agent captures a flag or repr...
By Joas Antonio dos Santos Barbosa