Towards Unifying Quantitative Security Benchmarking for Multi Agent Systems
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
Evolving AI systems increasingly deploy multi-agent architectures where autonomous agents collaborate, share information, and delegate tasks through developing protocols. This connectivity, while powerful, introduces novel security risks. One such risk is a cascading risk: a breach in one agent can cascade through the system, compromising others by exploiting inter-agent trust. In tandem with OWASP's initiative for an Agentic AI Vulnerability Scoring System we define an attack vector, Agent Cascading Injection, analogous to Agent Impact Chain and Blast Radius, operating across networks of agents. In an ACI attack, a malicious input or tool exploit injected at one agent leads to cascading compromises and amplified downstream effects across agents that trust its outputs. We formalize this attack with an adversarial goal equation and key variables (compromised agent, injected exploit, polluted observations, etc.), capturing how a localized vulnerability can escalate into system-wide failure. We then analyze ACI's properties -- propagation chains, amplification factors, and inter-agent compound effects -- and map these to OWASP's emerging Agentic AI risk categories (e.g. Impact Chain and Orchestration Exploits). Finally, we argue that ACI highlights a critical need for quantitative benchmarking frameworks to evaluate the security of agent-to-agent communication protocols. We outline a methodology for stress-testing multi-agent systems (using architectures such as Google's A2A and Anthropic's MCP) against cascading trust failures, developing upon groundwork for measurable, standardized agent-to-agent security evaluation. Our work provides the necessary apparatus for engineers to benchmark system resilience, make data-driven architectural trade-offs, and develop robust defenses against a new generation of agentic threats.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 11 of its 14 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jul 2025.
Builds on
11 of 14 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Securing Agentic AI: A Comprehensive Threat Model and Mitigation Framework for Generative AI Agents28 Apr
- 2025A Survey on Trustworthy LLM Agents: Threats and Countermeasures12 Mar
- 2025CORBA: Contagious Recursive Blocking Attacks on Multi-Agent Systems Based on Large Language Models20 Feb
- 2024AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents11 Oct
- 2024Prompt Infection: LLM-to-LLM Prompt Injection within Multi-Agent Systems9 Oct
Other references · 6
- 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
- 2024Great, Now Write an Article About That: The Crescendo Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreak Attackcited by 390
- 2025Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AIcited by 163
- 2025A Survey of AI Agent Protocolscited by 81
- 2024COMMA: A Communicative Multimodal Multi-Agent Benchmarkcited by 14
- 2025From Glue-Code to Protocols: A Critical Analysis of A2A and MCP Integration for Scalable Agent Systemscited by 14
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Open Challenges in Multi-Agent Security: Towards Secure Systems of Interacting AI Agents
- 2026Stealth Apart, Harm Together: Skill Cascading Attacks on Skill-Based Agent Systems
- 2026SoK: The Attack Surface of Agentic AI - Tools and Autonomy
- 2026Security Considerations for Multi-agent Systems
- 2025Exposing Weak Links in Multi-Agent Systems under Adversarial Prompting
- 2026Architecture Matters for Multi-Agent Security
- 2026Auditing Cascading Risks in Multi-Agent Systems via Semantic-Geometric Co-evolution
- 2026CASPIAN: Online Detection and Attribution of Cascade Attacks in LLM Multi-Agent Systems via Cross-Channel Causal Monitoring