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

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.10281 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.10281/

## 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.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)
- LLM safety and security / [Prompt injection and agent security](https://mlsanity.com/safety/prompt-injection-and-agent-security/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02483/) (2023)
- [Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.12173/) (2023)
- [Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.09527/) (2022)
- [Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05499/) (2023)
- [InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02691/) (2024)
- [Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02644/) (2024)
- [Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12815/) (2023)
- [Security and Privacy Challenges of Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.00888/) (2024)
- [ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10753/) (2024)
- [Demystifying RCE Vulnerabilities in LLM-Integrated Apps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.02926/) (2023)
- [Prompt Injection 2.0: Hybrid AI Threats](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.13169/) (2025)

## 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.
