arXiv preprint ·
Blocking at the Boundary: Auditing Long-Horizon Agents against Staged Prompt Injection
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Long-horizon agents consume external content, invoke tools, and modify persistent state. Indirect prompt injection can exploit task-specific context, propagate across causally connected stages, and alter a consequential action while the workflow continues; we term this staged prompt injection. We build an automated, feedback-guided attack generation pipeline and apply it to Claude Code and Codex in their native runtimes. The confirmed attacks span eight workflow scenarios, seven attack goals, and six injection surfaces, showing that production agents are vulnerable to context-aware, multi-step injection over long horizons. Stopping such attacks requires a decision before each consequential action: input screening and completed-run evaluation cannot locate the intervention point, and existing pre-action methods use incompatible units and labels. We therefore formulate boundary action auditing: given initial context, a trajectory prefix, and a fully specified pending message or tool call, an auditor predicts Pass or Block before its effect occurs. Pairing attacked and benign executions yields a 479-pair, 3,112-unit benchmark. We further propose Path-Aligned Attribution (PAA), a training-free auditor that decomposes pending actions into operative elements and traces what supplied each value and guided each decision. PAA blocks only when the model attributes an unwarranted, material effect on an element to an attacker-reachable source that either provides unqualified steering or conflicts with visible evidence. Under full-benchmark fail-open scoring with Claude Sonnet 5, PAA reaches 86% Block recall at a 6-8% false-block rate (FBR), whereas ARGUS reaches 44-47% recall at 16-33% FBR. Under the same backend, on the tool calls that all three auditors natively support, PAA has higher recall and lower FBR than VIGIL and ARGUS; all paired 95% confidence intervals exclude zero.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Cryptography & Security
Invisible Ink, Visible Lies: How Production Watermarking Causes LLMs to Hallucinate
Visual Grounding Safety in Vision-Language Models
Bounded Reasoning: Cognitive Hierarchy in Human-versus-AI Cyber Defense
SimpleMark: Fast Multi-Bit Text Watermarking under f -Divergence Constraints
WLPA: A Network Management Framework for Allocating Scarce Quantum-Safe Link Postures under Weakest-Link Exposure
Get the few papers worth your time in Cryptography & Security every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.