arXiv:2608. 19216v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI control research asks how to deploy models safely even when they may be misaligned, but many control protocols assume that the deployer can instrument the model and its surrounding pipeline.
arXiv:2607. 13040v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper examines where final authority should sit once capable AI systems are embedded in organizational workflows.
arXiv:2606. 12320v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Enterprise security was built to govern data boundaries: the protected surface was data at rest and in transit, and the controls -- access control, data-loss prevention, perimeter inspection -- governed crossings of that boundary.
arXiv:2606. 04104v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent systems execute through runtimes with very different control points: local coding tools, framework SDKs, managed agent platforms, API gateways, and observer-only integrations.
arXiv:2606. 22916v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI agents increasingly act through external tools: they read private data, construct structured payloads, submit write requests, export records, and coordinate workflows across application boundaries.
arXiv:2608. 19278v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The most capable general-purpose AI (GPAI) models are mostly built in two jurisdictions, the United States and China, but the risks they carry land globally.
arXiv:2606. 19464v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autonomous agentic AI systems driven by Large Language Models (LLMs) introduce a new class of security, privacy, and compliance challenges: an agent that can invoke tools, manipulate data, install software, and coordinate with peer agents across organizational boundaries must be constrained not just by authentication and access control, but by the full structure of enterprise governance.
arXiv:2608. 14074v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents increasingly act on external systems through standardized tool-calling protocols such as the Model Context Protocol (MCP), yet no infrastructure layer constrains their actions to what a principal has verifiably authorized: authorization logic lives in application code, is neither signed nor independently auditable, and the resulting logs lack evidentiary value.
arXiv:2608. 06353v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We give a formal mechanism design model for the continuous participatory governance of a deployed AI agent.
arXiv:2606. 03518v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As AI systems evolve from passive models into autonomous active agents capable of initiating actions, collaborating, and delegating tasks, the traditional boundaries of software systems blur.
arXiv:2607. 05743v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI coding agents now read repositories, call tools, and execute shell commands with limited human oversight, and a fast-growing body of work studies whether the execution layer around them is actually safe.
arXiv:2607. 22611v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The deployment of autonomous AI agents in production infrastructure introduces fundamental security challenges that traditional role-based access control (RBAC) models cannot address.
AI agents increasingly act through external tools: they read private data, construct structured payloads, submit write requests, export records, and coordinate workflows across application boundaries. Existing authorization mechanisms usually ask whether an integration credential, app, or token can call a tool.