arXiv Computation and Language
Honeyquest for LLMs: Rethinking Cyber Deception for AI Attackers
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Oct 5
AgentTrap: Stateful Feedback Deception against Autonomous Penetration Testing Agents
arXiv:2610.02869v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous penetration testing agents conduct multi-step attacks by continuously adapting their plans and actions to target responses. As a common de...
arXiv AI
Aug 5
Your Agentic LLMs Secretly Encode Latent Signals of Indirect Prompt-Injection Exposure
arXiv:2608. 02657v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic LLMs are vulnerable to indirect prompt injection (IPI) attacks, e.
arXiv AI
Jun 19
One Probe Won't Catch Them All: Towards Targeted Deception Detection
arXiv:2602. 01425v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Linear probes are a promising approach for monitoring AI systems for deceptive behaviour.
arXiv AI
Sep 23
Connecting the Dots in Agentic AI Security: A Cross-Dimensional Threat Taxonomy, Evaluation Maturity, and Open Challenges
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 Machine Learning
Jul 30
AgentSnare: Learning to Delay, Divert, and Defuse Autonomous Penetration Agents
arXiv:2607. 26998v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents automate penetration testing through an observation-action loop, selecting actions based on observations returned by tools.
arXiv AI
Oct 15
Telling FIBS: Probes Effectively Detect Sabotage and Catch Unverbalized Deception
arXiv:2610.12445v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent incidents have highlighted the challenge of monitoring LLM agents and the danger of models deceiving people. We show that white-box de...