Secure and Efficient Access Control for Computer-Use Agents via Context Space
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language model (LLM)-based computer-use agents represent a convergence of AI and OS capabilities, enabling natural language to control system- and application-level functions. However, due to LLMs' inherent uncertainty issues, granting agents control over computers poses significant security risks. When agent actions deviate from user intentions, they can cause irreversible consequences. Existing mitigation approaches, such as user confirmation and LLM-based dynamic action validation, still suffer from limitations in usability, security, and performance. To address these challenges, we propose CSAgent, a system-level, static policy-based access control framework for computer-use agents. To bridge the gap between static policy and dynamic context and user intent, CSAgent introduces intent- and context-aware policies, and provides an automated toolchain to assist developers in constructing and refining them. CSAgent enforces these policies through an optimized OS service, ensuring that agent actions can only be executed under specific user intents and contexts. CSAgent supports protecting agents that control computers through diverse interfaces, including API, CLI, and GUI. We implement and evaluate CSAgent, which successfully defends against all attacks in the benchmarks while introducing only 1.99% performance overhead and 5.42% utility decrease.
Key facts. Cited by 10 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 32 of its 73 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2025.
Builds on
32 of 73 references.
Closest ancestors · 8
Same direction, newest first
- 2025AgentSentinel: An End-to-End and Real-Time Security Defense Framework for Computer-Use Agents9 Sep
- 2025SAFEFLOW: A Principled Protocol for Trustworthy and Transactional Autonomous Agent Systems9 Jun
- 2025Progent: Securing AI Agents with Privilege Control16 Apr
- 2025ShieldAgent: Shielding Agents via Verifiable Safety Policy Reasoning26 Mar
- 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents24 Mar
- 2025RTBAS: Defending LLM Agents Against Prompt Injection and Privacy Leakage13 Feb
- 2024AirGapAgent: Protecting Privacy-Conscious Conversational Agents8 May
- 2024IsolateGPT: An Execution Isolation Architecture for LLM-Based Agentic Systems8 Mar
Other references · 24
- 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIscited by 1,880
- 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,565
- 2023The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Surveycited by 1,422
- 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,339
- 2024OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environmentscited by 1,134
- 2023CogAgent: A Visual Language Model for GUI Agentscited by 692
- 2024AndroidWorld: A Dynamic Benchmarking Environment for Autonomous Agentscited by 450
- 2024The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructionscited by 441
- 2024Hallucination is Inevitable: An Innate Limitation of Large Language Modelscited by 329
- 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queriescited by 325
- 2023AutoDroid: LLM-powered Task Automation in Androidcited by 178
- 2024Large Language Model-Brained GUI Agents: A Surveycited by 160
12 more
- 2024Optimization-based Prompt Injection Attack to LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 123
- 2024AnyTool: Self-Reflective, Hierarchical Agents for Large-Scale API Callscited by 121
- 2024GUI Agents with Foundation Models: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 110
- 2025Learn-by-interact: A Data-Centric Framework for Self-Adaptive Agents in Realistic Environmentscited by 93
- 2024System-Level Defense against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks: An Information Flow Control Perspectivecited by 91
- 2025Contextual Agent Security: A Policy for Every Purposecited by 55
- 2025ACE: A Security Architecture for LLM-Integrated App Systemscited by 52
- 2023Demystifying RCE Vulnerabilities in LLM-Integrated Appscited by 35
- 2025Towards Trustworthy GUI Agents: A Surveycited by 33
- 2024GoEX: Perspectives and Designs Towards a Runtime for Autonomous LLM Applicationscited by 22
- 2015Android Permissions Remystified: A Field Study on Contextual Integritycited by 15
- 2025Hallucination Stations: On Some Basic Limitations of Transformer-Based Language Modelscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 9.
10 papers.
- 2025SoK: Trust-Authorization Mismatch in LLM Agent Interactionscited by 11
- 2026Reframing LLM Agent Security as an Agent-Human Interaction Problemcited by 8
- 2026Options, Not Clicks: Lattice Refinement for Consent-Driven MCP Authorizationcited by 4
- 2026Intent-Governed Tool Authorization for AI Agentscited by 3
- 2026How Agents Ask for Permission: User Permissions for AI Agents, from Interfaces to Enforcementcited by 2
- 2026When Convenience Becomes Risk: A Semantic View of Under-Specification in Host-Acting Agentscited by 1
- 2026Securing Computer-Use Agents: A Unified Architecture-Lifecycle Framework for Deployment-Grounded Reliabilitycited by 0
- 2026Terminal Agents: A Survey of AI Agents in Command-Line Environmentscited by 0
- 2026AgentHijack: Visual Patch Attacks on Multimodal Computer-Use Agentscited by 0
- 2026Secure-CUA: Controlling Untrusted Influence in Computer-Use Agentscited by 0
- 2026Secure-CUA: Controlling Untrusted Influence in Computer-Use Agents7 Oct 2026
- 2026AgentHijack: Visual Patch Attacks on Multimodal Computer-Use Agents6 Sep 2026
- 2026Terminal Agents: A Survey of AI Agents in Command-Line Environments20 Aug 2026
- 2026How Agents Ask for Permission: User Permissions for AI Agents, from Interfaces to Enforcement15 Jul 2026
- 2026Intent-Governed Tool Authorization for AI Agents22 Jun 2026
- 2026Reframing LLM Agent Security as an Agent-Human Interaction Problem23 May 2026
- 2026Options, Not Clicks: Lattice Refinement for Consent-Driven MCP Authorization12 May 2026
- 2026Securing Computer-Use Agents: A Unified Architecture-Lifecycle Framework for Deployment-Grounded Reliability8 May 2026
- 2026When Convenience Becomes Risk: A Semantic View of Under-Specification in Host-Acting Agents22 Mar 2026
- 2025SoK: Trust-Authorization Mismatch in LLM Agent Interactions7 Dec 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025AgentBound: Securing Execution Boundaries of AI Agents
- 2026Taming Various Privilege Escalation in LLM-Based Agent Systems: A Mandatory Access Control Framework
- 2026Toward Securing AI Agents Like Operating Systems
- 2025Who Grants the Agent Power? Defending Against Instruction Injection via Task-Centric Access Control
- 2025A Vision for Access Control in LLM-based Agent Systems
- 2026Toward Secure LLM Agents: Threat Surfaces, Attacks, Defenses, and Evaluation
- 2026AgentVisor: Defending LLM Agents Against Prompt Injection via Semantic Virtualization
- 2025SAGA: A Security Architecture for Governing AI Agentic Systems