arXiv preprint ·
Monitor-Validity Failures: LLM Safety Evidence Paths at Evolving Framework Boundaries
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Modern LLM applications rely on runtime monitors that inspect tool calls, traces, streams, detector outputs, and verifier inputs. This creates an interface-reliability problem: a framework path may remain operational while policy-relevant evidence never reaches its decision point. In one representative case, a regex detector returned a positive match, but the framework stranded the result before the block decision. This differs from jailbreaks and detector errors because the evidence is already recognized yet disconnected from enforcement. We study this repair-boundary signature with canary contracts: parent/fixed confirmation units that place a known payload only on the changed evidence surface and record monitor visibility together with the downstream decision for action-boundary cases. Applying the protocol to public framework repairs, we confirm 18 evidence-path failures across 11 LLM or agent safety project groups and four implementation ecosystems. Nine are established-boundary repairs, eight are new-surface policy-coverage gaps, and one is a boundary-only evidence case. Fourteen reach E1 enforcement boundaries: seven native action outcomes, six configured enforcement boundaries, and one synthetic-consumer consequence. The remaining cases affect verifier, safety-prompt, or observability channels. The cases form carrier, adapter, authority, and surface families and show how ordinary application behavior can remain intact while a safety-specific evidence path misses its decision. Exact revisions, deterministic outcomes, negative controls, and a frozen prospective audit document the confirmation rule. Monitor assumptions therefore need regression tests at the schemas, streams, tools, and adapters that frameworks evolve.
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 Artificial Intelligence
Veil-Then-Reveal: Protecting PII Privacy via Reversible Pseudo-Anonymization in Zero-Trust User--LLM Interaction
Can Agents Keep Secrets They Were Never Told? Benchmarking Latent Privacy Risks Across Sessions with MemJoin
Watermarkability: Measuring and Improving Language-Model Compatibility with Logit-Based Watermarks
Defending Against Dormant Poisoning Attacks Across Language and Multimodal Agents
Identify, Classify, Act: Per-Instruction Controlled Compliance for LLMs over External Data
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence 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.