mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Isolated but Exposed: Persistence-Based Memory Extraction Attack on LLM Agents

arXiv 2607.23444 ↗First posted 26 Jul 2026cs.CRcited by 2

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

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM-based agents extend large language models with long-term memory (LTM) that persists privacy-sensitive user data across sessions. Production systems mitigate extraction risks through memory isolation, binding each user's LTM to a unique identifier. This defense has blocked known attacks on shared storage, fostering the assumption that isolated LTM is secure. We identify the tool interface as an overlooked attack surface. Agents routinely embed LTM-retrieved data in tool invocation parameters, enabling a malicious tool to exfiltrate private memory without violating user-level isolation. Naive adaptations of user-side extraction techniques fail because the adversarial command's semantics interfere with retrieval precision, and platform-imposed tool-call limits constrain the extraction budget per trigger. We present SPORE, the first extraction attack designed for this threat model. SPORE decouples the adversarial command from retrieval anchors by persisting the command in short-term memory and emitting semantically pure anchors in tool responses. The restored retrieval precision enables a geometric coverage optimization over the embedding space that systematically steers anchors toward unexplored memory regions. To sustain extraction beyond tool-call limits, SPORE persists reactivation payloads in memory that automatically resume the attack within and across sessions without additional user triggers. SPORE achieves an 80.0% record extraction rate with unlimited triggers and 47.0% with only 20 triggers. In multi-user deployments, attackers can link extracted records to user identities, enabling targeted surveillance. These results demonstrate that memory isolation alone is insufficient and call for reexamining tool-side trust boundaries in agent architectures.

Key facts. Cited by 2 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 31 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jul 2026.

Builds on

31 of 38 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Unveiling Privacy Risks in LLM Agent Memory17 Feb
  2. 2024Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents3 Oct
  3. 2024Watch Out for Your Agents! Investigating Backdoor Threats to LLM-Based Agents17 Feb

Other references · 28

  1. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
  2. 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,779
  3. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
  4. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
  5. 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,537
  6. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,203
  7. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,339
  8. 2023Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIscited by 1,302
  9. 2021Improving language models by retrieving from trillions of tokenscited by 1,278
  10. 2023A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 1,227
  11. 2021BEIR: A Heterogenous Benchmark for Zero-shot Evaluation of Information Retrieval Modelscited by 1,225
  12. 2022Text Embeddings by Weakly-Supervised Contrastive Pre-trainingcited by 1,216
16 more
  1. 2024DeepSeek-V2: A Strong, Economical, and Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Language Modelcited by 1,093
  2. 2024Evaluating Very Long-Term Conversational Memory of LLM Agentscited by 800
  3. 2023REPLUG: Retrieval-Augmented Black-Box Language Modelscited by 786
  4. 2023In-Context Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 694
  5. 2023Tool Learning with Foundation Modelscited by 302
  6. 2024TradingAgents: Multi-Agents LLM Financial Trading Frameworkcited by 182
  7. 2023FinMem: A Performance-Enhanced LLM Trading Agent with Layered Memory and Character Designcited by 163
  8. 2024The Good and The Bad: Exploring Privacy Issues in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)cited by 159
  9. 2023SCM: Enhancing Large Language Model with Self-Controlled Memory Frameworkcited by 98
  10. 2023Conversational Health Agents: A Personalized LLM-Powered Agent Frameworkcited by 91
  11. 2024Follow My Instruction and Spill the Beans: Scalable Data Extraction from Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systemscited by 76
  12. 2024EHRAgent: Code Empowers Large Language Models for Few-shot Complex Tabular Reasoning on Electronic Health Recordscited by 75
  13. 2021MS MARCO: Benchmarking Ranking Models in the Large-Data Regimecited by 28
  14. 2025Silent Leaks: Implicit Knowledge Extraction Attack on RAG Systems through Benign Queriescited by 19
  15. 2025MemEngine: A Unified and Modular Library for Developing Advanced Memory of LLM-based Agentscited by 17
  16. 2024Towards Ethical Personal AI Applications: Practical Considerations for AI Assistants with Long-Term Memorycited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Hidden in Memory: Sleeper Memory Poisoning in LLM Agents
  2. 2026Spore: Efficient and Training-Free Privacy Extraction Attack on LLMs via Inference-Time Hybrid Probing
  3. 2026SMSR: Certified Defence Against Runtime Memory Poisoning in Persistent LLM Agent Systems
  4. 2026MemPoison: Uncovering Persistent Memory Threats and Structural Blind Spots in LLM Agents
  5. 2026Loss Landscape Poisoning: Targeted Extraction of Unseen Training Data from LLMs
  6. 2025MemoryGraft: Persistent Compromise of LLM Agents via Poisoned Experience Retrieval
  7. 2026ADAM: A Systematic Data Extraction Attack on Agent Memory via Adaptive Querying
  8. 2026Hijacking Agent Memory: Stealthy Trojan Attacks Through Conversational Interaction