mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Before the Tool Call: Deterministic Pre-Action Authorization for Autonomous AI Agents

arXiv 2603.20953 ↗First posted 21 Mar 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

AI agents today have passwords but no permission slips. They execute tool calls (fund transfers, database queries, shell commands, sub-agent delegation) with no standard mechanism to enforce authorization before the action executes. Current safety architectures rely on model alignment (probabilistic, training-time) and post-hoc evaluation (retrospective, batch). Neither provides deterministic, policy-based enforcement at the individual tool call level. We characterize this gap as the pre-action authorization problem and present the Open Agent Passport (OAP), an open specification and reference implementation that intercepts tool calls synchronously before execution, evaluates them against a declarative policy, and produces a cryptographically signed audit record. OAP enforces authorization decisions in a measured median of 53 ms (N=1,000). In a live adversarial testbed (4,437 authorization decisions across 1,151 sessions, 5,000 bounty), social engineering succeeded against the model 74.6% of the time under a permissive policy; under a restrictive OAP policy, a comparable population of attackers achieved a 0% success rate across 879 attempts. We distinguish pre-action authorization from sandboxed execution (contains blast radius but does not prevent unauthorized actions) and model-based screening (probabilistic), and show they are complementary. The same infrastructure that enforces security constraints (spending limits, capability scoping) also enforces quality gates, operational contracts, and compliance controls. The specification is released under Apache 2.0 (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18901596).

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Mar 2026.

Builds on

9 of 30 references.

References · 9

  1. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
  2. 2023Removing RLHF Protections in GPT-4 via Fine-Tuningcited by 171
  3. 2026Formal Policy Enforcement for Real-World Agentic Systemscited by 33
  4. 2025Building a Foundational Guardrail for General Agentic Systems via Synthetic Datacited by 29
  5. 2026The Attack and Defense Landscape of Agentic AI: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 28
  6. 2025ceLLMate: Sandboxing Browser AI Agentscited by 16
  7. 2026AgentGuardian: Learning Access Control Policies to Govern AI Agent Behaviorcited by 11
  8. 2026Proof-of-Guardrail in AI Agents and What (Not) to Trust from Itcited by 4
  9. 2026Trustworthy Agentic AI Requires Deterministic Architectural Boundariescited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 13.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Authorization Architectures for Tool-Using AI Agents
  2. 2026Cryptographically verifiable authorization for autonomous AI agents: a falsifiable hypothesis and proof of concept
  3. 2025Authenticated Delegation and Authorized AI Agents
  4. 2026Behavioral Governance for Autonomous AI Agents: The AgentBound Framework
  5. 2026AgentWall: A Runtime Safety Layer for Local AI Agents
  6. 2026Uncovering Security Threats and Architecting Defenses in Autonomous Agents: A Case Study of OpenClaw
  7. 2026OpenAgentFlow: Enabling System-Wide Safety Boundaries for Heterogeneous AI Agent Fleets
  8. 2026ClawLess: A Security Model of AI Agents