mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Analyzing Defensive Misdirection Against Model-Guided Automated Attacks on Agentic AI Systems

arXiv 2606.20470 ↗First posted 18 Jun 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 2

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Agentic AI systems increasingly rely on language-model components to interpret instructions, process external data, invoke tools, and coordinate with other agents. These capabilities make prompt-injection and jailbreak attacks more consequential, especially as attackers adopt model-guided automation to scale probing, prompt refinement, and response evaluation. This work analyzes the resulting attack-defense setting through a probabilistic model of a target system, its defense mechanism, and the attacker's automated judge. Our analysis shows that conventional detect-and-block defenses can allow attacker success rate (ASR) to approach one as the query budget grows, since predictable refusals provide useful feedback to automated search. We then examine detect-and-misdirect, where detected malicious interactions receive controlled, non-operational responses designed to induce false-positive errors in the attacker's judge. This strategy reduces the positive predictive value of attacker-selected candidates and yields a bounded asymptotic ASR. We evaluate a proof-of-concept realization of this strategy through Contextual Misdirection via Progressive Engagement (CMPE), a lightweight conversational misdirection method designed to replace predictable refusal text with safe but strategically misleading responses in automated jailbreak settings. On jailbreak benchmarks, CMPE reduces estimated ASR upper bounds by up to two orders of magnitude and nearly eliminates verified attack success in end-to-end experiments with PAIR, GPTFuzz, and AutoDAN-Turbo.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 28 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2026.

Builds on

28 of 37 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026MUZZLE: Adaptive Agentic Red-Teaming of Web Agents Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks9 Feb

Other references · 27

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  2. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
  3. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
  4. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
  5. 2023Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queriescited by 1,420
  6. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,085
  7. 2023AutoDAN: Generating Stealthy Jailbreak Prompts on Aligned Large Language Modelscited by 785
  8. 2023Tree of Attacks: Jailbreaking Black-Box LLMs Automaticallycited by 672
  9. 2023GPTFUZZER: Red Teaming Large Language Models with Auto-Generated Jailbreak Promptscited by 560
  10. 2024JailbreakBench: An Open Robustness Benchmark for Jailbreaking Large Language Modelscited by 536
  11. 2024A StrongREJECT for Empty Jailbreakscited by 385
  12. 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queriescited by 375
15 more
  1. 2023Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defensescited by 364
  2. 2024Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biasescited by 323
  3. 2024Deliberative Alignment: Reasoning Enables Safer Language Modelscited by 308
  4. 2024SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusalcited by 240
  5. 2024AutoDAN-Turbo: A Lifelong Agent for Strategy Self-Exploration to Jailbreak LLMscited by 199
  6. 2024Limitations of the LLM-as-a-Judge Approach for Evaluating LLM Outputs in Expert Knowledge Taskscited by 106
  7. 2024LLMmap: Fingerprinting For Large Language Modelscited by 58
  8. 2024Mission Impossible: A Statistical Perspective on Jailbreaking LLMscited by 24
  9. 2024PROMPTFUZZ: Harnessing Fuzzing Techniques for Robust Testing of Prompt Injection in LLMscited by 17
  10. 2024Hacking Back the AI-Hacker: Prompt Injection as a Defense Against LLM-driven Cyberattackscited by 15
  11. 2025Must Read: A Comprehensive Survey of Computational Persuasioncited by 13
  12. 2025Proactive defense against LLM Jailbreakcited by 7
  13. 2024Deciphering the Chaos: Enhancing Jailbreak Attacks via Adversarial Prompt Translationcited by 6
  14. 2025Targeting Alignment: Extracting Safety Classifiers of Aligned LLMscited by 3
  15. 2025"To Survive, I Must Defect": Jailbreaking LLMs via the Game-Theory Scenarioscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Architecting Secure AI Agents: Perspectives on System-Level Defenses Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks
  2. 2026The Attack and Defense Landscape of Agentic AI: A Comprehensive Survey
  3. 2026Beyond Attack-Success Rate: Action-Graded Severity Scale for Tool-Using AI Agents
  4. 2025Toward a Dynamic Stackelberg Game-Theoretic Framework for Agentic AI Defense Against LLM Jailbreaking
  5. 2026SoK: Rethinking Jailbreaking in the Era of Agentic AI: Attacks, Defenses, and Practical Consideration
  6. 2026SoK: The Attack Surface of Agentic AI - Tools and Autonomy
  7. 2025In-Context Defense in Computer Agents: An Empirical Study
  8. 2026Assessing Automated Prompt Injection Attacks in Agentic Environments