# Agent Security Needs Redefinition through a Holistic Framework

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.22024 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.22024/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Prompt injection and agent security, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security.
- Builds on 21 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Jul 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM safety and security / [Prompt injection and agent security](https://mlsanity.com/safety/prompt-injection-and-agent-security/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11432/) (2023)
- [Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01405/) (2023)
- [Red Teaming Language Models to Reduce Harms: Methods, Scaling Behaviors, and Lessons Learned](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.07858/) (2022)
- [Jailbreaking Leading Safety-Aligned LLMs with Simple Adaptive Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.02151/) (2024)
- [AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09024/) (2024)
- [AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12784/) (2024)
- [Prompt Injection Attack to Tool Selection in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19793/) (2025)
- [WASP: Benchmarking Web Agent Security Against Prompt Injection Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.18575/) (2025)
- [Securing AI Agents with Information-Flow Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23643/) (2025)
- [PromptArmor: Simple yet Effective Prompt Injection Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.15219/) (2025)
- [Design Patterns for Securing LLM Agents against Prompt Injections](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.08837/) (2025)
- [Get my drift? Catching LLM Task Drift with Activation Deltas](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.00799/) (2024)
- [AgentVigil: Generic Black-Box Red-teaming for Indirect Prompt Injection against LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.05849/) (2025)
- [Goal-guided Generative Prompt Injection Attack on Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.07234/) (2024)
- [PropensityBench: Evaluating Latent Safety Risks in Large Language Models via an Agentic Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.20703/) (2025)
- [COSMIC: Generalized Refusal Direction Identification in LLM Activations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.00085/) (2025)
- [A Framework for Formalizing LLM Agent Security](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.19469/) (2026)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Don't Offer What Can't Be Done: Deterministic Executability Gating for LLM Skill Selection at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.01050/) (2026)
- [HARDE: Optimizing Agent Harnesses for Runtime Risk Detection and Execution Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.38291/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Agent security is widely treated as a question about action content. Defenses ask whether an instruction looks malicious. Benchmarks ask whether an agent performs a harmful sounding action. We argue that agent security is fundamentally a contextual problem, and that the current content based framing systematically misdefines it. A command to ``delete user data'' might be a routine administrative request or a prompt injection attacking production systems, and the content alone cannot distinguish the two. Authorization context can. Across every injection task in AgentDojo and WASP, the same action is one an authenticated user would plausibly request in a routine workflow, which makes the conflation a structural property of evaluating security through content. We operationalize contextual security through four properties that must hold jointly and be evaluated continuously across the agent's trajectory. Source Authorization asks who issued the command. Task Alignment specifies the agent's authorized objective. Action Alignment evaluates whether each action serves that objective. Data Isolation governs information flows across privilege boundaries. Under this reframing, indirect prompt injection becomes a Source Authorization violation. Snapshot benchmarks are structurally incapable of evaluating Data Isolation. Existing defenses are reorganized around the property they actually approximate. The contextual reframing changes which defenses are coherent, which evaluations measure something useful, and which attack patterns evaluation can see at all.