# Securing AI Agents with Information-Flow Control

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23643 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23643/

## Key facts

- Cited by 121 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 25 of its 44 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 May 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.08155/) (2023)
- [Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.12173/) (2023)
- [Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05499/) (2023)
- [InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02691/) (2024)
- [The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13208/) (2024)
- [StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06363/) (2024)
- [Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02644/) (2024)
- [Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12815/) (2023)
- [Defeating Prompt Injections by Design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.18813/) (2025)
- [Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks With Spotlighting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.14720/) (2024)
- [Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.14197/) (2023)
- [Magentic-One: A Generalist Multi-Agent System for Solving Complex Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.04468/) (2024)
- [SecAlign: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05451/) (2024)
- [Grammar-Constrained Decoding for Structured NLP Tasks without Finetuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13971/) (2023)
- [Guiding LLMs The Right Way: Fast, Non-Invasive Constrained Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.06988/) (2024)
- [The Task Shield: Enforcing Task Alignment to Defend Against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16682/) (2024)
- [GradSafe: Detecting Jailbreak Prompts for LLMs via Safety-Critical Gradient Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13494/) (2024)
- [System-Level Defense against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks: An Information Flow Control Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.19091/) (2024)
- [Get my drift? Catching LLM Task Drift with Activation Deltas](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.00799/) (2024)
- [RTBAS: Defending LLM Agents Against Prompt Injection and Privacy Leakage](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.08966/) (2025)
- [Instructional Segment Embedding: Improving LLM Safety with Instruction Hierarchy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09102/) (2024)
- [Embedding-based classifiers can detect prompt injection attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.22284/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 121)

- [The Attacker Moves Second: Stronger Adaptive Attacks Bypass Defenses Against Llm Jailbreaks and Prompt Injections](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.09023/) (2025)
- [Skill-Inject: Measuring Agent Vulnerability to Skill File Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.20156/) (2026)
- [From Agent Traces to Trust: A Survey of Evidence Tracing and Execution Provenance in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.04990/) (2026)
- [Towards Verifiably Safe Tool Use for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.08012/) (2026)
- [Formal Policy Enforcement for Real-World Agentic Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.16708/) (2026)
- [The Landscape of Prompt Injection Threats in LLM Agents: From Taxonomy to Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.10453/) (2026)
- [PromptLocate: Localizing Prompt Injection Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.12252/) (2025)
- [BrowseSafe: Understanding and Preventing Prompt Injection Within AI Browser Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.20597/) (2025)
- [PIShield: Detecting Prompt Injection Attacks via Intrinsic LLM Features](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.14005/) (2025)
- [ObliInjection: Order-Oblivious Prompt Injection Attack to LLM Agents with Multi-source Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.09321/) (2025)
- [Securing LLM-Agent Long-Term Memory Against Poisoning: Non-Malleable, Origin-Bound Authority with Machine-Checked Guarantees](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.24322/) (2026)
- [CaMeLs Can Use Computers Too: System-level Security for Computer Use Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.09923/) (2026)
- [ceLLMate: Sandboxing Browser AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.12594/) (2025)
- [PISmith: Reinforcement Learning-based Red Teaming for Prompt Injection Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.13026/) (2026)
- [MemLineage: Lineage-Guided Enforcement for LLM Agent Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.14421/) (2026)
- [Agent-Sentry: Bounding LLM Agents via Execution Provenance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.22868/) (2026)
- [Ghost in the Agent: Redefining Information Flow Tracking for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.23374/) (2026)
- [Aligning Provenance with Authorization: A Dual-Graph Defense for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.26497/) (2026)
- [ARGUS: Defending LLM Agents Against Context-Aware Prompt Injection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.03378/) (2026)
- [Systems Security Foundations for Agentic Computing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.01295/) (2025)
- [How Not to Detect Prompt Injections with an LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.05630/) (2025)
- [CommandSans: Securing AI Agents with Surgical Precision Prompt Sanitization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.08829/) (2025)
- [Breaking and Fixing Defenses Against Control-Flow Hijacking in Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.17276/) (2025)
- [SoK: Trust-Authorization Mismatch in LLM Agent Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.06914/) (2025)
- [AgentGuardian: Learning Access Control Policies to Govern AI Agent Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.10440/) (2026)
- [The Granularity Mismatch in Agent Security: Argument-Level Provenance Solves Enforcement and Isolates the LLM Reasoning Bottleneck](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.11039/) (2026)
- [ChainCaps: Composition-Safe Tool-Using Agents via Monotonic Capability Attenuation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.26542/) (2026)
- [SecInfer: Preventing Prompt Injection via Inference-time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.24967/) (2025)
- [Optimizing Agent Planning for Security and Autonomy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.11416/) (2026)
- [Agent libOS: A Runtime Substrate for Capability-Controlled Self-Evolving LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.03895/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As AI agents become increasingly autonomous and capable, ensuring their security against vulnerabilities such as prompt injection becomes critical. This paper explores the use of information-flow control (IFC) to provide security guarantees for AI agents. We present a formal model to reason about the security and expressiveness of agent planners. Using this model, we characterize the class of properties enforceable by dynamic taint-tracking and construct a taxonomy of tasks to evaluate security and utility trade-offs of planner designs. Informed by this exploration, we present Fides, a planner that tracks confidentiality and integrity labels, deterministically enforces security policies, and introduces novel primitives for selectively hiding information. Its evaluation in AgentDojo demonstrates that this approach enables us to complete a broad range of tasks with security guarantees. A tutorial to walk readers through the the concepts introduced in the paper can be found at https://github.com/microsoft/fides