mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Demonstrations of Integrity Attacks in Multi-Agent Systems

arXiv 2506.04572 ↗First posted 5 Jun 2025cs.CLcited by 7

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in natural language understanding, code generation, and complex planning. Simultaneously, Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) have garnered attention for their potential to enable cooperation among distributed agents. However, from a multi-party perspective, MAS could be vulnerable to malicious agents that exploit the system to serve self-interests without disrupting its core functionality. This work explores integrity attacks where malicious agents employ subtle prompt manipulation to bias MAS operations and gain various benefits. Four types of attacks are examined: textitScapegoater, who misleads the system monitor to underestimate other agents' contributions; textitBoaster, who misleads the system monitor to overestimate their own performance; textitSelf-Dealer, who manipulates other agents to adopt certain tools; and textitFree-Rider, who hands off its own task to others. We demonstrate that strategically crafted prompts can introduce systematic biases in MAS behavior and executable instructions, enabling malicious agents to effectively mislead evaluation systems and manipulate collaborative agents. Furthermore, our attacks can bypass advanced LLM-based monitors, such as GPT-4o-mini and o3-mini, highlighting the limitations of current detection mechanisms. Our findings underscore the critical need for MAS architectures with robust security protocols and content validation mechanisms, alongside monitoring systems capable of comprehensive risk scenario assessment.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 13 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jun 2025.

Builds on

13 of 22 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Red-Teaming LLM Multi-Agent Systems via Communication Attacks20 Feb
  2. 2024JAILJUDGE: A Comprehensive Jailbreak Judge Benchmark with Multi-Agent Enhanced Explanation Evaluation Framework11 Oct
  3. 2024AutoDefense: Multi-Agent LLM Defense against Jailbreak Attacks2 Mar
  4. 2024PsySafe: A Comprehensive Framework for Psychological-based Attack, Defense, and Evaluation of Multi-agent System Safety22 Jan

Other references · 9

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  4. 2023CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Societycited by 1,348
  5. 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 995
  6. 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 724
  7. 2023Self-collaboration Code Generation via ChatGPTcited by 255
  8. 2024MultiAgent Collaboration Attack: Investigating Adversarial Attacks in Large Language Model Collaborations via Debatecited by 54
  9. 2025AgentBreeder: Mitigating the AI Safety Risks of Multi-Agent Scaffolds via Self-Improvementcited by 13

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 5.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Defending LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems Against Cooperative Attacks with Sentence-Level Rectification
  2. 2025The Dark Side of LLMs: Agent-based Attack Vectors for System-level Compromise
  3. 2024AgentMonitor: A Plug-and-Play Framework for Predictive and Secure Multi-Agent Systems
  4. 2025Shadows in the Code: Exploring the Risks and Defenses of LLM-based Multi-Agent Software Development Systems
  5. 2026On Understanding, Identifying, and Mitigating Vulnerabilities in Agentic Large Language Models
  6. 2026AgentLeak: Cloning Stronger LLM Agent Capabilities onto Weaker Agents Beyond Skill Stealing
  7. 2025Who's the Mole? Modeling and Detecting Intention-Hiding Malicious Agents in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
  8. 2026Black-Box Skill Stealing Attack from Proprietary LLM Agents: An Empirical Study