mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

From Prompt Injection to Web Exploitation: Revisiting Classic Vulnerabilities in LLM-Integrated Applications

arXiv 2608.10281 ↗First posted 10 Aug 2026cs.CRcited by 0

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

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models are increasingly integrated into web applications through chatbots, tool-calling pipelines, and agentic workflows. In these systems, user input may influence not only generated text, but also backend actions such as database queries, HTTP requests, file operations, template rendering, or API calls. This paper introduces LLM-mediated web attacks, a class of attacks in which attacker-controlled input is transformed by an LLM-integrated application and then reaches traditional web-application sinks. We systematize this attack surface through representative LLM2X variants, including LLM2SQLi, LLM2XSS, LLM2SSTI, LLM2CommandInjection, LLM2IDOR, LLM2CSRF, LLM2XXE, and LLM2SSRF. Our analysis shows that the LLM usually does not create the underlying vulnerability itself; rather, it acts as a mediation layer, and in some tool-enabled settings as a confused deputy, carrying attacker influence into components that trust model-generated or model-influenced content. As an experimental case study, we implement TicketOracle, a Flask-based LLM-integrated web application for evaluating LLM2SSRF across five attack scenarios and seven LLMs. Our results show substantial variation in susceptibility across models, suggesting that exploitation depends both on insecure application architecture and model-specific behavior. We conclude with mitigation strategies across the prompt, model, application, and network layers.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Aug 2026.

Builds on

12 of 26 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents3 Oct
  2. 2024InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agents5 Mar

Other references · 10

  1. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
  2. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
  3. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
  4. 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 832
  5. 2023Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applicationscited by 605
  6. 2023Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defensescited by 364
  7. 2024Security and Privacy Challenges of Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 186
  8. 2024ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stagescited by 82
  9. 2023Demystifying RCE Vulnerabilities in LLM-Integrated Appscited by 37
  10. 2025Prompt Injection 2.0: Hybrid AI Threatscited by 13

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Shifting from Injection to Interaction: Rethinking Web Security in the Age of LLMs and Beyond
  2. 2026Toward Secure LLM Agents: Threat Surfaces, Attacks, Defenses, and Evaluation
  3. 2025Exploiting Web Search Tools of AI Agents for Data Exfiltration
  4. 2025LLM Agents for Automated Web Vulnerability Reproduction: Are We There Yet?
  5. 2024LLM Agents can Autonomously Hack Websites
  6. 2025A Multi-Agent LLM Defense Pipeline Against Prompt Injection Attacks
  7. 2026A Layered Security Framework Against Prompt Injection in RAG-Based Chatbots
  8. 2023Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models