Visual Confused Deputy: Exploiting and Defending Perception Failures in Computer-Using Agents
On the map: LLM safety and security → Prompt injection and agent security
Abstract (arXiv)
Computer-using agents (CUAs) act directly on graphical user interfaces, yet their perception of the screen is often unreliable. Existing work largely treats these failures as performance limitations, asking whether an action succeeds, rather than whether the agent is acting on the correct object at all. We argue that this is fundamentally a security problem. We formalize the visual confused deputy: a failure mode in which an agent authorizes an action based on a misperceived screen state, due to grounding errors, adversarial screenshot manipulation, or time-of-check-to-time-of-use (TOCTOU) races. This gap is practically exploitable: even simple screen-level manipulations can redirect routine clicks into privileged actions while remaining indistinguishable from ordinary agent mistakes. To mitigate this threat, we propose the first guardrail that operates outside the agent's perceptual loop. Our method, dual-channel contrastive classification, independently evaluates (1) the visual click target and (2) the agent's reasoning about the action against deployment-specific knowledge bases, and blocks execution if either channel indicates risk. The key insight is that these two channels capture complementary failure modes: visual evidence detects target-level mismatches, while textual reasoning reveals dangerous intent behind visually innocuous controls. Across controlled attacks, real GUI screenshots, and agent traces, the combined guardrail consistently outperforms either channel alone. Our results suggest that CUA safety requires not only better action generation, but independent verification of what the agent believes it is clicking and why. Materials are providedfootnoteModel, benchmark, and code: https://github.com/vllm-project/semantic-router.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompt injection and agent security, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 13 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Mar 2026.
Builds on
13 of 22 references.
Closest ancestors · 4
Same direction, newest first
- 2026ToolSafe: Enhancing Tool Invocation Safety of LLM-based agents via Proactive Step-level Guardrail and Feedback15 Jan
- 2025Measuring Harmfulness of Computer-Using Agents31 Jul
- 2025OS-Harm: A Benchmark for Measuring Safety of Computer Use Agents17 Jun
- 2024AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents11 Oct
Other references · 9
- 2025Qwen2.5-VL Technical Reportcited by 5,418
- 2025UI-TARS: Pioneering Automated GUI Interaction with Native Agentscited by 584
- 2025ScreenSpot-Pro: GUI Grounding for Professional High-Resolution Computer Usecited by 246
- 2025UFO2: The Desktop AgentOScited by 38
- 2025AgentGuard: Repurposing Agentic Orchestrator for Safety Evaluation of Tool Orchestrationcited by 25
- 2025AgentSentinel: An End-to-End and Real-Time Security Defense Framework for Computer-Use Agentscited by 25
- 2025OSWorld-MCP: Benchmarking MCP Tool Invocation In Computer-Use Agentscited by 25
- 2025A Systematization of Security Vulnerabilities in Computer Use Agentscited by 11
- 2025Delegated Authorization for Agents Constrained to Semantic Task-to-Scope Matchingcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.
7 papers.
- 2026Temporary Authority, Permanent Effects: Commit-Time Authorization for LLM Agentscited by 17
- 2026CUADebug: Diagnosing and Repairing Computer-Use Agent Failurescited by 3
- 2026The Workload-Router-Pool Architecture for LLM Inference Optimization: A Vision Paper from the vLLM Semantic Router Projectcited by 1
- 2026Chain-of-Authorization: Embedding authorization into large language modelscited by 0
- 2026Temporal UI State Inconsistency in Desktop GUI Agents: Formalizing and Defending Against TOCTOU Attacks on Computer-Use Agentscited by 0
- 2026Do GUI Agents Believe Their Eyes? Diagnosing State-Belief Reliance on Pixels versus Structurecited by 0
- 2026Trust propagation and structural containment in Multi-agent LLM pipelinescited by 0
- 2026Trust propagation and structural containment in Multi-agent LLM pipelines15 Sep 2026
- 2026CUADebug: Diagnosing and Repairing Computer-Use Agent Failures31 Jul 2026
- 2026Temporary Authority, Permanent Effects: Commit-Time Authorization for LLM Agents11 Jul 2026
- 2026Do GUI Agents Believe Their Eyes? Diagnosing State-Belief Reliance on Pixels versus Structure5 Jul 2026
- 2026Temporal UI State Inconsistency in Desktop GUI Agents: Formalizing and Defending Against TOCTOU Attacks on Computer-Use Agents20 Apr 2026
- 2026Chain-of-Authorization: Embedding authorization into large language models24 Mar 2026
- 2026The Workload-Router-Pool Architecture for LLM Inference Optimization: A Vision Paper from the vLLM Semantic Router Project22 Mar 2026