An Information Flow Graph monitor is introduced that analyzes structural security regressions using control-flow and data-flow graph diffs alongside raw code diffs and suggests that untrained structural monitors provide a practical and auditable path toward democratizing deployment safety for organizations seeking trustworthy adoption of advanced AI agents.
Abstract
AI software development agents are increasingly capable of modifying infrastructure and security critical systems, creating risks where an agent completes its assigned task while covertly weakening safeguards through actions such as broadening permissions, degrading logging, or introducing persistence mechanisms. While frontier laboratories may deploy sophisticated monitoring pipelines, many organizations and individual users adopting coding agents lack the resources and governance maturity required to maintain complex learned monitor ensembles. We study this problem as infrastructure level sabotage under task success in the infrastructure-as-code setting from ControlArena and compare trained and untrained monitors across synchronous and asynchronous deployment modes. We introduce an Information Flow Graph (IFG) monitor that analyzes structural security regressions using control-flow and data-flow graph diffs alongside raw code diffs. In asynchronous evaluation, an untrained git diff monitor misses 11.6% attacks at 1% false positive rate auditing budget, our untrained IFG monitor reduces this to 3.5%, and the trained Async RF monitor achieves below 1%. Unlike the trained Async RF monitor, IFG can also operate synchronously as a pre-deployment safeguard that blocks suspicious infrastructure changes before execution or merge. In synchronous mode, IFG realtime rollback reduces joint main task and covert task success from 74.4% to 0.0% with no measurable reduction in legitimate task completion. These results suggest that untrained structural monitors provide a practical and auditable path toward democratizing deployment safety for organizations seeking trustworthy adoption of advanced AI agents.
A governance and security-by-design framework that embeds responsibility mechanisms directly into agentic AI architectures, enabling continuous self-monitoring and alignment verification through multi-agent governance systems.
Himanshu Joshi, Shivani Shukla· Proceedings of IASEAI Confer...· 0 citations
InfraBench is presented, a benchmark suite for evaluating AI agents on realistic infrastructure tasks across the full system stack and full operational lifecycle with fine-grained risk assessment and shows that even the strongest agent cannot secure a full score across all tasks.
Yuan Gao, Zeren Yang, Junnan Li et al.· 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
This paper presents a large-scale empirical study using the AIDev dataset to systematically characterize security code smells in agent-generated pull requests (PRs), finding that human collaborators are responsible for introducing 67.6% of genuine leaked secrets within these agent-assisted workflows.
A. H. M. Nazmus Sakib, Dipayan Banik, Murtuza Jadliwala· arXiv.org· 0 citations
A four-dimensional Integration Friction Index is introduced that separates one-time engineering cost from recurring organisational, legal, and maintenance cost and shows why scope and budget enforcement cannot be delegated to system prompts.
Israt Moyeen Noumi, Tarannum Ahmed Nowshin, Md Mehedi Hasan Nipu et al.· 0 citations
This work presents AHA, a falsifiable discovery loop that proposes a vulnerability hypothesis, constructs a falsifier, instantiates a valid attack, executes it in a sandboxed harness, reflects on the trajectory, and promotes confirmed findings into a Vulnerability Concept Graph (VCG), which provides an auditable artifa...