A taxonomy of how different systems specify user-level permissions policies, both at the user interface and internally; derive internal policies from user input; and enforce those policies at run-time is constructed.
Abstract
As AI agents gain prevalence, users are increasingly exposed to the risks such systems entail. Prompt injection attacks, as well as hallucination, can cause agents to leak private information to third parties. As autonomous systems, agents also present the more active danger of performing sensitive tasks, such as bank transactions, without the user's intent or authorization. Recognizing this challenge, the agentic security community has developed numerous proposals for secure agentic systems. Much of this work has focused on product-level approaches, where agentic system developers determine and apply the same security policies and permissions to all users. Yet different users have different needs and preferences, necessitating support for user-level permissions policies in agentic AI systems. To understand how user-level permissions are handled in AI agent systems, we survey 21 proposals for agent permissions systems. From this review, we construct a taxonomy of how different systems specify user-level permissions policies, both at the user interface and internally; derive internal policies from user input; and enforce those policies at run-time. We then analyze five prominent commercial agents and compare their permissions handling to agentic permissions systems in the literature. We identify several high-level themes across the literature and commercial agents, as well as multiple gaps where future work is needed.
Tool-using artificial intelligence (AI) agents, systems that autonomously invoke application programming interfaces (APIs), databases, browsers, and inter-agent protocols such as the Model Context Protocol (MCP), are becoming production infrastructure. Yet the security model governing when an agent is authorized to act...
The compromised-model evaluation tests APC independently of model behavior by inserting the ground-truth attack call after the first legitimate tool call, which proves Blast Radius Monotonicity and Composition Soundness for APC implementations and proves Blast Radius Monotonicity and Composition Soundness for APC imple...
A mechanism in which a language model maps actions to plain-language consequence categories with user-authored"allow","ask", or"never"rules is examined, and a gap between preference and commitment is revealed: repeatedly choosing "ask" preserves case-by-case choice but prevents a standing policy from settling decisions...
The results show that MetaPermit produces 31% more consistent authorization decisions than LLM-driven authorization and outperforms the state-of-the-art defenses CaMeL and IPIGuard in both task completion and robustness to IPI attacks, with no malicious tool calls executed.
Han-Zhang Ma, Alicia Y. Hariri, Tian-Xiang Shen et al.· 0 citations
Mobile agents are increasingly capable of autonomously interacting with mobile applications and performing consequential actions on behalf of users. Effective human oversight of such agents relies on a basic premise: users and agents observe consistent information from the same interface. We show that this premise can...
Heng Li, Fu-Lin Zhao, Zheng-Cong Geng et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.