arXiv AI
Jun 18
Code-Augur: Agentic Vulnerability Detection via Specification Inference
arXiv:2606. 18619v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The advent of agentic vulnerability detection is already becoming a watershed moment for software security.
From Capability to Assurance in Autonomous Penetration-Testing Harnesses: A Framework and Reference Implementation
Related stories
arXiv AI
Oct 2
PACE: Provenance-Aware Capability Enforcement for Tool-Using LLM Agents
The paper introduces PACE, a Provenance-Aware Capability Enforcement system designed to secure tool-using large language model agents by mediating every tool call before execution. PACE employs path confinement to limit influence paths and verifies effects against authenticated authority, distinguishing certified execution contracts from evaluated configurations. Experiments on eight agent‑security benchmarks show that the evaluated configuration reduces attack success in most cases while maintaining near‑native utility.
arXiv AI
Jun 4
From Agent Traces to Trust: Evidence Tracing and Execution Provenance in LLM Agents
arXiv:2606. 04990v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents increasingly solve complex tasks by interacting with external tools, retrieval systems, memory modules, environments, and other agents.
arXiv AI
Jul 3
Safety Testing LLM Agents at Scale: From Risk Discovery to Evidence-Grounded Verification
arXiv:2607. 01793v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly perform autonomous actions through external tools, leading to complex and evolving safety risks.
arXiv AI
Sep 23
When the Agent Becomes the Kernel: A Systematization of Security on the Path to AI-Native Operating Systems
The paper discusses how large language model agents now act as privileged principals with kernel‑grade authority, yet lack the trusted mediation traditionally required for operating‑system security. It introduces a taxonomy that distinguishes between provenance‑based deterministic checks and content‑semantic checks, identifying a central mediation gap in distinguishing data from instruction and authorized from unauthorized actions. The authors argue that this gap creates an irreducible risk of undetected attacks whenever inputs and actions are not pre‑enumerated, and they propose defenses across runtime monitoring, architectural separation, and authorization while critiquing current evaluation practices. They extend the analysis to AI‑native operating systems where the model itself serves as the arbitration core, outlining design constraints, challenges, and a research agenda.
arXiv AI
Jul 29
Explanation-Bound Tool Execution for AI Agents: Server-Verified Action Claims Without Trusting Model Rationales
arXiv:2607. 25364v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using agents expose structured calls but commonly attach free-form rationales.
arXiv AI
Sep 28
AgentXploit: Autonomous Repository-to-Runtime Red-Teaming for AI Agents
AgentXploit is a two‑role auditing system that separates repository‑level attack‑path discovery from runtime exploitation for AI agents. The Analyzer Agent traces attacker‑controlled inputs to sensitive operations and records candidate attack paths, while the Exploiter Agent turns these paths into concrete attacks and refines them using runtime feedback. The system is evaluated on AgentXploit‑Bench, a benchmark of 72 reproducible vulnerabilities across 12 open‑source AI‑agent systems, achieving 59.3% end‑to‑end success compared to 38.4% for Codex, and 79.2% attack success on AgentDojo versus 52.7% for AgentVigil.
arXiv AI
Sep 25
Calibrated Decision Models for Autonomous Penetration-Testing Harnesses: JEV and Laya as System One Decision Layers for LLM-Driven Pentest Agents
The paper proposes using lightweight, calibrated System One decision models—specifically JEV and Laya—to improve autonomous penetration-testing harnesses that rely on large language models (LLMs). It defines four key decision points (finding adjudication, severity recalibration, agent pruning, and confirmation loops) and presents a NeuroSploit case study showing differences in severity distribution, runtime, and grading when using TypeSafe System One. The authors review existing System One specifications, discuss various RL-based training approaches, and introduce Rave, a domain‑adapted model with a proposed training and evaluation framework.
arXiv AI
Jul 8
Proof of Execution: Runtime Verification for Governed AI Agent Actions
arXiv:2607. 05397v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent systems increasingly execute rather than advise.
arXiv AI
Oct 2
Actions with Receipts: Jointly Binding Claims, Evidence, and Execution for Replayable Tool-Agent Auditing
The paper introduces a claim‑anchored execution contract that binds a tool‑using agent’s emitted claim to its exact source span, the ordered execution prefix that produced it, and the source version and access state observed. Each receipt contains deterministic anchors, source identifiers, offsets, hashes, quotes, and a domain‑separated execution commitment, allowing a verifier to reconstruct these bindings before semantic or task labels are joined. The contract defines seven independently testable properties and demonstrates high detection rates against cross‑object attacks, with strong performance on conflict‑aware support guard evaluations.
arXiv AI
Aug 28
How Do LLM Agents Actually Get the Flag? Trace-Level Provenance for Agentic Offensive Security Evaluation
The paper introduces CTF-ABACUS, a trace-based auditing framework that reconstructs each autonomous language-model agent’s run in Capture-the-Flag (CTF) challenges into evidence‑grounded solve profiles. By decomposing actions into penetration‑testing phases and techniques, it distinguishes genuine exploitation from shortcut methods such as memorized recall or guessing. Applying the framework to 1,435 CTF attempts by six models on 240 challenges shows that only 62‑87% of recovered flags are trace‑verified, highlighting that many successes rely on shallow trajectories rather than true exploitation.
arXiv AI
Oct 23
Who Verifies the Builder? Toward Independent Assurance for Agent-Produced Software
The paper discusses the need for independent assurance when coding agents produce both software and its correctness evidence. It identifies four gaps—requirement, conformance, evaluation, and model—between stakeholder intent and production, and proposes a verification framework that separates building from verifying. The framework introduces a Verification Contract, a specification-first phase, and an implementation-aware phase using mutation analysis, property-based testing, and fuzzing, and is evaluated in a study showing that an external verifier detected more seeded faults than the builder’s own tests.