The paper introduces ASLEval, a framework for measuring privacy exposure displacement in large language model (LLM) agent sessions. It highlights that traditional local proxies—such as inspecting a single action or final response—often miss unauthorized data leaks elsewhere in a multi-step session. ASLEval pre-registers hidden target sets, tracks all declared visible exits, and preserves internal traces for diagnosis, revealing that a single outlet view can overlook nearly 47% of exposure and that internal evidence typically precedes visible leaks. The study underscores the need for benchmarks that define complete visible boundaries, ground claims in pre-specified targets, and report privacy alongside task utility.
arXiv:2606. 00152v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents are rapidly advancing, autonomously invoking external tools to complete multi-step tasks for users.
arXiv:2606. 28061v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have increasingly moved from standalone text generation systems to agents that invoke external tools, access environments, and execute multi-step tasks.
CIPL (Channel Inversion for Privacy Leakage) is a channel-aware framework designed to evaluate black-box privacy leakage in large language model agents. It models the leakage process through stages of sensitive source, selection, assembly, execution, observation, and extraction, assessing how selected sensitive units become attacker-recoverable outputs. Experiments across memory, retrieval, and tool-mediated targets, plus a live-agent case study, reveal that recoverability depends on factors beyond storage labels, such as observation surface, prompt alignment, retrieval depth, and provider behavior, and that a semantic audit can uncover disclosures missed by exact matching.
arXiv:2607. 19449v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Evaluation frameworks for tool-augmented LLM agents focus overwhelmingly on capability metrics or explicit tool crashes, leaving silent infrastructure failures and HTTP 200 responses with empty, null, or malformed payloads largely unaudited.
The paper introduces SARA, a framework that separates action induction from runtime authorization in tool‑augmented LLM agents. By treating these as distinct roles, SARA uses an Action Probe to record action provenance and only authorizes tool calls that align with the user objective and past successful executions. Experiments on AgentDojo and AgentDyn show that SARA reduces action‑to‑side‑effect risk to below 0.63% while preserving task performance.
arXiv:2512. 16310v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: LLM-based agents increasingly use multiple external tools to complete complex tasks.
BodhiPromptShield is a policy‑aware mediation layer for LLM agent pipelines that detects sensitive text spans before they propagate, replacing them with typed placeholders, semantic abstractions, or secure tokens and restoring them only at authorized execution boundaries. In evaluations on AI4Privacy, PrivacyLens, and AgentDojo datasets, the system reduces identifier exposure to 7.4% and 1.8% respectively, and limits exact identifier leakage in final actions to 2.1–3.1%. While mediation preserves factual content according to automated metrics, human annotations show a significant drop in inferability from 100% to 24–53%, indicating the need for human validation of semantic‑leakage measures.
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...
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:2609.14987v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents interact with external environments through tool invocation, but tool outputs can also expose them to indirect prom...
arXiv:2602. 11510v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) systems create privacy risks that current output-only benchmarks cannot measure.
arXiv:2607. 20827v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents choose tools and arguments from context that mixes user requests, tool outputs, retrieved records, memory, and untrusted text.