mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Propagating Unsafe Actions in LLM Controlled Multi-Robot Collaboration via Single Robot Compromise

arXiv 2605.15641 ↗First posted 15 May 2026cs.RO cs.CRcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as general planners in embodied intelligence, enabling high level coordination and low level task planning for both single robot and multi-robot collaboration. This increasing reliance on embodied LLM planners also raises critical security concerns, since misaligned or manipulated instructions can be translated into physical actions. Prior work has studied such threats in single robot settings, while security risks in LLM controlled multi-robot collaboration, especially those propagated through inter robot communication, remain largely unexplored. To bridge this gap, we propose a novel attack paradigm for multi-robot system in which the adversary interacts with only a single entry robot. The compromised robot then propagates malicious intent through peer communication, leading to coordinated unsafe actions across the system. Our evaluation, covering high risk dimensions of dereliction of duty, privacy compromise, and public safety hazards, reveals a persistent safety alignment gap in multi-robot planners. We quantify this process with three metrics, obedience, infectiousness, and stealthiness. Experiments demonstrate both persistent attacker control and rapid propagation: obedience reaches 1.00 in the strongest cases, and infectiousness rises to 0.90. Notably, the attack is highly efficient, requiring as few as 3.0 rounds to compromise all the robots while maintaining a stealthiness score of 0.81. Such risks are amplified when robots must resolve trade offs in critical situations, such as emergencies or conflicts of rights, because the coordination mechanism can unintentionally allow adversarial instructions to override safety requirements. The code is available at https://github.com/TheFatInsect/InfectBot.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 15 May 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.

5 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Trust in LLM-controlled Robotics: a Survey of Security Threats, Defenses and Challenges
  2. 2026From Prompt to Physical Actuation: Holistic Threat Modeling of LLM-Enabled Robotic Systems
  3. 2025Enhancing Reliability in LLM-Integrated Robotic Systems: A Unified Approach to Security and Safety
  4. 2026Silent Sabotage: Internal State Triggered Backdoor Attacks on LLM-Powered Robotic Systems
  5. 2026When Prompts Control Robots: Prompt Injection Attacks in Multi-Agent Robotic Systems
  6. 2026Semantic Denial of Service in LLM-controlled robots
  7. 2025SafePlan: Leveraging Formal Logic and Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Enhanced Safety in LLM-based Robotic Task Planning
  8. 2024BadRobot: Jailbreaking Embodied LLM Agents in the Physical World