mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Securing LLM-Agent Long-Term Memory Against Poisoning: Non-Malleable, Origin-Bound Authority with Machine-Checked Guarantees

arXiv 2606.24322 ↗First posted 23 Jun 2026cs.CRcited by 14

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

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents increasingly rely on persistent long-term memory, which creates a critical vulnerability that we study here: memory poisoning. An adversary can store untrusted content in one session that later steers a consequential action, such as a payment, a setting change, or data exfiltration, in a future session. Existing defenses base a memory item's authority to act on either its content (detection or trust-scoring) or its derivation history (lineage). We show that both signals are malleable. An attacker can launder an untrusted origin through three channels specific to LLM agents: the agent's own summarization, a trusted-tool echo, and manufactured corroboration. Each makes the content look benign and breaks or flips its derivation edge to ``trusted.'' We formalize malleability for the memory write-retrieve-act pipeline and prove a machine-checked separation theorem. No content- or lineage-based defense is sound under laundering (T1), write-time origin binding is necessary (T2), and non-malleable origin-bound authority with Sybil-resistant corroboration-gated elevation is sufficient (T3). Our construction, TMA-NM (Tamper-evident Memory Authority, Non-Malleable), instantiates non-malleable information-flow control (IFC) for LLM-agent memory. A cross-defense, cross-attack, and cross-model benchmark over eight frontier models shows that existing defenses fail exactly where the theory predicts (up to 68% laundering attack-success), while TMA-NM reaches 0% attack success on both direct and laundering attacks across all models and channels, at full legitimate utility. We release the benchmark, harness, and machine-checked TLA+ models to support reproducibility.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 33 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jun 2026.

Builds on

33 of 42 references.

Closest ancestors · 22

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Hijacking Agent Memory: Stealthy Trojan Attacks Through Conversational Interaction28 May
  2. 2026MemMorph: Tool Hijacking in LLM Agents via Memory Poisoning24 May
  3. 2026Hidden in Memory: Sleeper Memory Poisoning in LLM Agents14 May
  4. 2026MemLineage: Lineage-Guided Enforcement for LLM Agent Memory14 May
  5. 2026Trojan Hippo: Weaponizing Agent Memory for Data Exfiltration3 May
  6. 2026Ghost in the Agent: Redefining Information Flow Tracking for LLM Agents25 Apr
  7. 2026A Systematic Survey of Security Threats and Defenses in LLM-Based AI Agents: A Layered Attack Surface Framework25 Apr
  8. 2026Visual Inception: Compromising Long-term Planning in Agentic Recommenders via Multimodal Memory Poisoning18 Apr
  9. 2026A Survey on Long-Term Memory Security in LLM Agents: Attacks, Defenses, and Governance Across the Memory Lifecycle17 Apr
  10. 2026A Formal Security Framework for MCP-Based AI Agents: Threat Taxonomy, Verification Models, and Defense Mechanisms7 Apr
  11. 2026From Storage to Steering: Memory Control Flow Attacks on LLM Agents16 Mar
  12. 2026SuperLocalMemory: Privacy-Preserving Multi-Agent Memory with Bayesian Trust Defense Against Memory Poisoning17 Feb
10 more
  1. 2026Taming Various Privilege Escalation in LLM-Based Agent Systems: A Mandatory Access Control Framework17 Jan
  2. 2026Memory Poisoning Attack and Defense on Memory Based LLM-Agents9 Jan
  3. 2025MemoryGraft: Persistent Compromise of LLM Agents via Poisoned Experience Retrieval18 Dec
  4. 2025Security Analysis of Agentic AI Communication Protocols: A Comparative Evaluation5 Nov
  5. 2025DrunkAgent: Stealthy Memory Corruption in LLM-Powered Recommender Agents31 Mar
  6. 2025Defeating Prompt Injections by Design24 Mar
  7. 2025Memory Injection Attacks on LLM Agents via Query-Only Interaction5 Mar
  8. 2024AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases17 Jul
  9. 2024Watch Out for Your Agents! Investigating Backdoor Threats to LLM-Based Agents17 Feb
  10. 2024Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Training10 Jan

Other references · 11

  1. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
  2. 2023MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systemscited by 1,295
  3. 2025Mem0: Building Production-Ready AI Agents with Scalable Long-Term Memorycited by 722
  4. 2024PoisonedRAG: Knowledge Corruption Attacks to Retrieval-Augmented Generation of Large Language Modelscited by 251
  5. 2025Securing AI Agents with Information-Flow Controlcited by 108
  6. 2025TrustRAG: Enhancing Robustness and Trustworthiness in Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 37
  7. 2026MemMachine: A Ground-Truth-Preserving Memory System for Personalized AI Agentscited by 14
  8. 2025Improving Google A2A Protocol: Protecting Sensitive Data and Mitigating Unintended Harms in Multi-Agent Systemscited by 9
  9. 2017Nonmalleable Information Flow: Technical Reportcited by 3
  10. 2026Selection Integrity for LLM Graph Memory: An Accumulability Criterion for Information-Flow-Blind Retrievalcited by 2
  11. 2026Mesh Memory Protocol: Semantic Infrastructure for Multi-Agent LLM Systemscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 14.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Memory Provenance Laundering in LLM Agents: A Non-Amplification Firewall for Persistent Memory
  2. 2026From Untrusted Input to Trusted Memory: A Systematic Study of Memory Poisoning Attacks in LLM Agents
  3. 2026Agent Memory Is a Surface for Endogenous Authorization Laundering
  4. 2026SMSR: Certified Defence Against Runtime Memory Poisoning in Persistent LLM Agent Systems
  5. 2026The Price of Safety: Benign-Case Utility and Token Overhead of Memory-Poisoning Defenses in LLM Agents
  6. 2025Unveiling Privacy Risks in LLM Agent Memory
  7. 2026Proof-of-Execution Memory: Defending LLM Agents Against Forged-Reasoning Attacks by Verifying What Actually Happened
  8. 2026AgentSys: Secure and Dynamic LLM Agents Through Explicit Hierarchical Memory Management