# Security Attack and Defense Strategies for Autonomous Agent Frameworks: A Layered Review with OpenClaw as a Case Study

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.27464 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.27464/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 32 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 32)

- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03442/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11432/) (2023)
- [Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.12173/) (2023)
- [Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15334/) (2023)
- [Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05499/) (2023)
- [Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15817/) (2023)
- [Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02644/) (2024)
- [Poisoning Web-Scale Training Datasets is Practical](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.10149/) (2023)
- [R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10019/) (2024)
- [Prompt Injection Attack to Tool Selection in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19793/) (2025)
- [Adaptive Attacks Break Defenses Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.00061/) (2025)
- [Red-Teaming LLM Multi-Agent Systems via Communication Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14847/) (2025)
- [PromptArmor: Simple yet Effective Prompt Injection Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.15219/) (2025)
- [AGrail: A Lifelong Agent Guardrail with Effective and Adaptive Safety Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11448/) (2025)
- [ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10753/) (2024)
- [Safeguarding Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.02622/) (2024)
- [From Prompt Injections to Protocol Exploits: Threats in LLM-Powered AI Agents Workflows](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.23260/) (2025)
- [Hammer: Robust Function-Calling for On-Device Language Models via Function Masking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.04587/) (2024)
- [Supply-Chain Poisoning Attacks Against LLM Coding Agent Skill Ecosystems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.03081/) (2026)
- [Memory Poisoning Attack and Defense on Memory Based LLM-Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05504/) (2026)
- [TrustRAG: Enhancing Robustness and Trustworthiness in Retrieval-Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.00879/) (2025)
- [Defending Against Prompt Injection with DataFilter](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.19207/) (2025)
- [ChatInject: Abusing Chat Templates for Prompt Injection in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.22830/) (2025)
- [From Assistant to Double Agent: Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks on OpenClaw for Personalized Local AI Agent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.08412/) (2026)
- [A Survey on Long-Term Memory Security in LLM Agents: Attacks, Defenses, and Governance Across the Memory Lifecycle](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.16548/) (2026)
- [Tool Preferences in Agentic LLMs are Unreliable](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.18135/) (2025)
- [Indirect Prompt Injections: Are Firewalls All You Need, or Stronger Benchmarks?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.05244/) (2025)
- [PISmith: Reinforcement Learning-based Red Teaming for Prompt Injection Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.13026/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Autonomous agent frameworks built upon large language models (LLMs) are evolving into complex, tool-integrated, and continuously operating systems, introducing security risks beyond traditional prompt-level vulnerabilities. As this paradigm is still at an early stage of development, a timely and systematic understanding of its security implications is increasingly important. Although a growing body of work has examined different attack surfaces and defense problems in agent systems, existing studies remain scattered across individual aspects of agent security, and there is still a lack of a layered review on this topic. To address this gap, this survey presents a layered review of security risks and defense strategies in autonomous agent frameworks, with OpenClaw as a case study. We organize the analysis into four security-relevant layers: the context and instruction layer, the tool and action layer, the state and persistence layer, and the ecosystem and automation layer. For each layer, we summarize its functional role, representative security risks, and corresponding defense strategies. Based on this layered analysis, we further identify that threats in autonomous agent frameworks may propagate across layers, from manipulated inputs to unsafe actions, persistent state contamination, and broader ecosystem-level impact. Finally, we highlight potential key challenges, including research imbalance across layers, the lack of long-horizon evaluation, and weak ecosystem trust models, and outline future directions toward more systematic and integrated defenses.