The paper introduces threat‑preserving representation sensitivity (TPRS) to assess how changes in agent‑visible wording affect attack success rates (ASR) while keeping the underlying task and evaluation criteria constant. Experiments on Agent Security Bench, MCPTox, and AgentDojo show that renaming threat‑related tools can significantly alter ASR—up to +13.21 percentage points on some models—yet may also degrade benign utility. The findings suggest that security scores based on a single representation may not generalize, urging robustness claims to be validated across multiple threat‑preserving representations.
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.
arXiv:2609.23894v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic AI extends LLM security beyond generated content to persistent state, autonomous actions, tool use, and interactions with humans and other ag...
arXiv:2605. 17480v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multi-agent systems extend large language models (LLMs) by decomposing tasks among specialized agents, but their distributed decision process creates new attack surfaces.
arXiv:2606. 15057v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Indirect prompt injection (IPI) is a major security threat to LLM-powered agents.
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.
arXiv:2606. 02240v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Indirect prompt injection in tool-use agents is a concrete production threat: LLM agents read from integrations (third-party services such as Gmail, Salesforce, or Jira accessed through tool calls) whose response content the user neither writes nor controls.
AgentAudit is an open, extensible framework that evaluates the full lifecycle of AI agents, assessing planning, tool selection, execution, memory, and reasoning across ten dimensions such as instruction integrity, security, and alignment. Unlike existing benchmarks that focus on single aspects, AgentAudit analyzes the entire execution trace to attribute failures to specific stages. The framework was tested on five large language models, revealing significant differences in trustworthiness even among models with similar task‑completion performance.
arXiv:2609.01487v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Skill-augmented agents load reusable skills as persistent runtime context, improving task performance but also giving malicious skills a durable chan...
arXiv:2609.06972v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM agents complete tasks by issuing sequences of tool calls, and every observation they read is a channel through which an indirect prompt injection...
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.
arXiv:2610.00400v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-turn attacks on agentic systems can compose individually permissible actions into harmful outcomes, challenging defenses that assess actions or...
arXiv:2606. 05233v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent computer-using-agent (CUA) red-teaming papers report prompt-injection attack success rates (ASR) of 42-98%, but these headline numbers cluster on retired models and on the most-vulnerable model in each paper's panel.