ShareLock: A Stealthy Multi-Tool Threshold Poisoning Attack Against MCP
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
With the rapid evolution of LLM-driven agents, Model Context Protocol (MCP), an open protocol bridging LLMs with external tools, has quickly become foundational to modern agent ecosystems. However, the expanding adoption of MCP has also introduced novel security concerns such as Tool Poisoning Attack (TPA), which exploit LLM-server interactions to inject malicious prompts. Existing poisoning schemes typically adopt a monolithic plaintext embedding paradigm, which fails to withstand manual inspection or automated detectors. Current research still lacks a systematic analysis on multi-tool poisoning, where multiple tools can be exploited cooperatively to disperse detection risk. In this paper, we introduce ShareLock, a multi-tool threshold poisoning framework that utilizes Shamir's threshold scheme to ensure exceptional stealth and fault tolerance. ShareLock distributes the malicious instruction as benign-looking secret shares across multiple tool descriptions, achieving both information-theoretic secrecy and attack robustness against moderate auditing. After a covert reconstruction trigger is planted during server update, the aggregated shares reconstruct the hidden instruction, resulting in critical breaches of system assets or private data. To evaluate the realistic threat of ShareLock, we constructed a comprehensive benchmark encompassing four multi-tool scenarios and conducted extensive experiments across mainstream LLMs on two distinct MCP clients. Our results demonstrate that ShareLock significantly outperforms existing single-tool poisoning strategies in tool description-based detection while maintaining an average attack success rate exceeding 90%.
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 11 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Jun 2026.
Builds on
11 of 32 references.
Closest ancestors · 6
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Red-Teaming Coding Agents from a Tool-Invocation Perspective: An Empirical Security Assessment6 Sep
- 2025MCP Safety Training: Learning to Refuse Falsely Benign MCP Exploits using Improved Preference Alignment29 May
- 2025MPMA: Preference Manipulation Attack Against Model Context Protocol16 May
- 2025MCP Guardian: A Security-First Layer for Safeguarding MCP-Based AI System17 Apr
- 2025MCP Safety Audit: LLMs with the Model Context Protocol Allow Major Security Exploits2 Apr
- 2025Safety at Scale: A Comprehensive Survey of Large Model and Agent Safety2 Feb
Other references · 5
- 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
- 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
- 2025DataSentinel: A Game-Theoretic Detection of Prompt Injection Attackscited by 143
- 2025MCIP: Protecting MCP Safety via Model Contextual Integrity Protocolcited by 34
- 2025Odysseus: Jailbreaking Commercial Multimodal LLM-integrated Systems via Dual Steganographycited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026MCP-ITP: An Automated Framework for Implicit Tool Poisoning in MCP
- 2025MCPTox: A Benchmark for Tool Poisoning Attack on Real-World MCP Servers
- 2026When the Manual Lies: A Realistic Benchmark to Evaluate MCP Poisoning Attacks for LLM Agents
- 2025MindGuard: Intrinsic Decision Inspection for Securing LLM Agents Against Metadata Poisoning
- 2025MCP Security Bench (MSB): Benchmarking Attacks Against Model Context Protocol in LLM Agents
- 2026VIPER-MCP: Detecting and Exploiting Taint-Style Vulnerabilities in Model Context Protocol Servers
- 2025MCPXKIT: The Unified Toolkit for Analyzing Model Context Protocol Security
- 2026Breaking the Protocol: Security Analysis of the Model Context Protocol Specification and Prompt Injection Vulnerabilities in Tool-Integrated LLM Agents