It is argued that adversarial vulnerability stems from the absence of boundary verification, a security primitive that enforces explicit validation of data as it crosses inter-agent boundaries, including content, identity, execution intent, and state integrity.
Abstract
Multi-agent LLM pipelines orchestrate multiple specialized language model agents into structured workflows where intermediate outputs are passed across agents to solve complex tasks. This design introduces a security gap absent in single-agent settings: once an agent accepts adversarial content, it is propagated as trusted input throughout the pipeline. We argue that this vulnerability stems from the absence of boundary verification, a security primitive that enforces explicit validation of data as it crosses inter-agent boundaries, including content, identity, execution intent, and state integrity. Without such verification, modern pipelines embed implicit trust assumptions that are not adversarially robust, giving rise to structurally distinct attack surfaces (e.g., content injection, agent impersonation, plan deviation, and memory poisoning). Leveraging annotated production traces from the GAIA and SWE-Bench benchmark, we show that these vulnerabilities arise in benign deployments and largely evade existing evaluation frameworks. We further operationalize these failure modes within a controlled multi-agent setting and evaluate them across GPT-5-mini, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and Kimi K2.5 under identical pipeline configurations. The results reveal that attack success aligns with pipeline structure rather than model capability, indicating that adversarial vulnerability is fundamentally an architectural property and motivating a shift toward pipeline-level defenses.
A previously unstated class of adversarial input called a clean attack - an input that is syntactically correct, semantically consistent with the declared task context, consistent with all observable policy constraints and still has the goal of misguiding the agent away from the original operator goal - is identified a...
Harsh Verma· International Journal of Sci...· 1 citation
RedAgentBench is introduced, an executable framework for autonomous red-teaming and faithful measurement that shows that executable evaluation can improve safety measurement and identify actionable intervention points.
Zixing Chen, Xingyuan Liu, Jie Zhu et al.· 3 citations
To the authors' knowledge, ThreatForest is the first end-to-end system that turns a code repository into TTP-mapped attack trees with evidence-based mitigations across adversary frameworks, with a reusable framework for benchmarking such systems.
C. Leo, Anton Dykyi, Danny Cortegaca et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
This work argues that agentic risk is progressive: it can enter at four loci of the agent control loop--skill admission, invocation-time intent, execution-time effect, and post-action consequence--while a denied dangerous objective can reappear across surface forms, tools, or turns.
Kai Wang, Zeming Wei, Biaojie Zeng et al.· 0 citations
This paper presents the first systematic empirical study in the financial domain to characterize how an adversarial signal enters a multi-agent trading system and how far it survives toward the decision, and evaluates four communication topologies under data- and agent-level attacks.
CheolWon Na, Hao Ni, Lukasz Szpruch et al.· 0 citations
A four-layer taxonomy mapping 13 vulnerability types across perception, brain, action, and interaction layers is contributed, and seven open problems centered on containment are identified.
Md Jafrin Hossain, Mohammad Arif Hossain, Nirwan Ansari· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.