mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Demystifying and Detecting Agentic Workflow Injection Vulnerabilities in GitHub Actions

arXiv 2605.07135 ↗First posted 8 May 2026cs.CRcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

GitHub Actions is increasingly used to deploy LLM-based agents for repository-centric tasks such as issue triage, pull-request review, code modification, and release assistance. These agentic workflows extend traditional CI/CD automation with agentic capabilities but also create a new injection surface. In this paper, we introduce Agentic Workflow Injection (AWI), a workflow-level injection flaw where untrusted GitHub event context, such as issue bodies, pull-request descriptions, or comments, is incorporated into agent prompts or agent-consumed inputs and converted into attacker-influenced behavior through agent tools or downstream workflow logic. We identify two core AWI patterns: Prompt-to-Agent (P2A), where untrusted content reaches an agent prompt boundary, and Prompt-to-Script (P2S), where attacker influence propagates through model- or agent-derived outputs into later scripts. We present the first systematic study of AWI in GitHub Actions. We characterize 1,033 real-world AI-assisted actions and extract AWI-specific taint specifications, including prompt boundaries, derived outputs, agentic capabilities, and access-control interfaces. Based on these specifications, we design TaintAWI, a taint-analysis tool that tracks flows from untrusted event context to agent prompt inputs and security-sensitive workflow sinks. Applying TaintAWI to 13,392 real-world agentic workflows from 10,792 repositories, we report 519 potential AWI vulnerabilities, of which 496 are confirmed exploitable under our threat model, yielding a precision of 95.6%. Among them, 343 are previously unknown zero-day vulnerabilities. We prioritized disclosure for 187 zero-day cases, received 26 maintainer responses, and 24 cases have been accepted or fixed at the time of writing.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 13 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.

Builds on

13 of 37 references.

References · 13

  1. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,203
  2. 2024Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agentscited by 341
  3. 2025Prompt Injection Attack to Tool Selection in LLM Agentscited by 145
  4. 2024The Emerged Security and Privacy of LLM Agent: A Survey with Case Studiescited by 127
  5. 2024AI Agents Under Threat: A Survey of Key Security Challenges and Future Pathwayscited by 122
  6. 2025AgentAuditor: Human-Level Safety and Security Evaluation for LLM Agentscited by 82
  7. 2023Demystifying RCE Vulnerabilities in LLM-Integrated Appscited by 35
  8. 2025Les Dissonances: Cross-Tool Harvesting and Polluting in Pool-of-Tools Empowered LLM Agentscited by 19
  9. 2024Large Language Models as Software Components: A Taxonomy for LLM-Integrated Applicationscited by 17
  10. 2026ChainFuzzer: Greybox Fuzzing for Workflow-Level Multi-Tool Vulnerabilities in LLM Agentscited by 8
  11. 2026YASA: Scalable Multi-Language Taint Analysis on the Unified AST at Ant Groupcited by 3
  12. 2022Automatic Security Assessment of GitHub Actions Workflowscited by 2
1 more
  1. 2026Unpacking Security Scanners for GitHub Actions Workflowscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Specifying and Maintaining Agentic Workflows: An Empirical Study of GitHub Agentic Workflows
  2. 2026Comment and Control: Hijacking Agentic Workflows via Context-Grounded Evolution
  3. 2026AgentLogs: A Dataset for Opening the Black Box of GitHub's Cloud Agent
  4. 2026Reliability of AI Bots Footprints in GitHub Actions CI/CD Workflows
  5. 2026XAgent: eXecution-guided Agentic AI for Effective Localization and Resolution of GitHub Issues
  6. 2026Security in the Age of AI Teammates: An Empirical Study of Agentic Pull Requests on GitHub
  7. 2025On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub
  8. 2024Evaluating Software Development Agents: Patch Patterns, Code Quality, and Issue Complexity in Real-World GitHub Scenarios