Sep 2026· The Pinnacle: A Journal by Scholar-Practitioners· 0 citations· 2 references
TL;DR
The findings demonstrate that safeguarding agentic AI frameworks require multi-layered technical controls, zero-trust architecture, automated schema validation, and strict identity governance, rather than reliance on static boundary controls.
Abstract
Modern Artificial Intelligence (AI) infrastructures and Model Context Protocol (MCP) deployments face systemic security exposures as a result of autonomous agents interacting directly with external databases and tools. Protocol-level weaknesses, permissive access rights, and unverified third-party repositories allow attackers to execute prompt injection attacks, exfiltrate credentials, and manipulate tool metadata schemas. This paper examines security incidents across five primary domains: tool and server security, prompt and context security, data security and privacy, system and operational security, and authentication and identity security. Underlying root causes and effective mitigation strategies are explored through real-world case studies, including supply chain compromises, cross-repository data leaks, path traversal flaws, and authentication failures. The findings demonstrate that safeguarding agentic AI frameworks require multi-layered technical controls, zero-trust architecture, automated schema validation, and strict identity governance, rather than reliance on static boundary controls.
- The rapid adoption of agentic artificial intelligence has transformed large language models into agents that can discover tools, access resources, process information, and execute actions in external environments. The Model Context Protocol (MCP) supports this transformation by enabling standardized interaction betwe...
Khalid D. Muhammed, David Chinonso Anih· Iconic research and engineer...· 0 citations
Agentic artificial intelligence expands the enterprise security boundary because autonomous agents can plan
tasks, retain memory, invoke tools, call APIs, and initiate business actions. Authentication at session start is therefore
insufficient when later actions may be influenced by untrusted content, poisoned memory,...
S. Suryawanshi· International Journal of Inn...· 0 citations
Large Language Model (LLM) agents integrate memory, tool invocation, environment interaction, and multi-agent collaboration, evolving from passive text-generation tools into autonomous systems that execute complex tasks. This capability leap creates a pronounced security duality. On the one hand, LLM agents face emergi...
Da Fu, Da-Lin Xiang· Science Discovery Computers· 0 citations
Agentic AI systems built on large language models can plan over multiple steps, use external tools, retain information in memory, and coordinate with other agents. These capabilities make them more useful than static language models, but they also introduce new security and operational risks. Untrusted content from web...
Fayeq Jeelani Syed, Rehan Ahmad, Ali Al Bataineh et al.· 0 citations
A systematic security analysis of AP2 v0.2 based on its roles, transaction lifecycle, deployment architectures, and trust boundaries shows that valid mandate signatures alone do not ensure that an agent-mediated transaction reflects the user's intent when its pre-authorization context is manipulated.
A. Aviv, Parth A. Gandh, Ron Bitton et al.· 0 citations
Enterprise adoption of generative AI is shifting from passive question answering to autonomous agentic execution. Modern agents can decompose goals, retrieve business context, call tools, update records, send messages, initiate transactions, and coordinate workflows across multiple systems. This creates productivity op...
Swapneswar Ray· International Journal of Glo...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.