mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Security Assessment of DeepSeek Harness with A.I.G: Evaluating Resistance to Indirect Prompt Injection

arXiv 2608.16393 ↗First posted 17 Aug 2026cs.CRcited by 1

On the map: LLM safety and security → Prompt injection and agent security

Abstract (arXiv)

We assess indirect prompt injection in DeepSeek Harness (DSH), using AI-Infra-Guard (A.I.G) to construct tests, deliver controlled taint, execute DSH, collect traces, and judge outcomes. The study covers 14,560 controlled executions over 16 indirect-content channels, text and file carrier modes, 35 payload objectives, one unmodified baseline, and 12 attack methods. The experiment preserves DSH's agent loop, tool registry, model adapter, and session-event path; source tools and sensitive sinks are local fixtures, so attempted actions are recorded without external side effects. We evaluate each trace with a deterministic rule-based judge, JudgeR (RuleJudge), and a semantic LLM-based judge, JudgeL (LLMJudge). The strongest observed attack success rates are 17.0% under JudgeL for fake-completion attack in text mode, 25.5% under JudgeR for hidden Unicode in file mode, and 16.0% under JudgeR for the skills channel in file mode. JudgeL also assigns partial compliance more often than JudgeR (7.3% versus 2.0%). We relate these results to DSH's treatment of tool results, additional contexts, and tool-call policy hooks, then identify controls that should sit between untrusted content and sensitive actions. Our code is available at https://github.com/Tencent/AI-Infra-Guard/tree/main/Research/deepseek-harness-security-assessment .

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 9 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Aug 2026.

Builds on

9 of 11 references.

Closest ancestors · 9

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026SkillJack: Persistent Skill Backdoors in Self-Evolving Agents4 Aug
  2. 2026Securing the AI Agent: A Unified Framework for Multi-Layer Agent Red Teaming30 Jun
  3. 2026AgentVisor: Defending LLM Agents Against Prompt Injection via Semantic Virtualization27 Apr
  4. 2024AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases17 Jul
  5. 2024Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks With Spotlighting20 Mar
  6. 2024InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agents5 Mar
  7. 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queries9 Feb
  8. 2023Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models21 Dec
  9. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection23 Feb

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026The Framing Gap: Indirect Prompt-Injection Exfiltration Defeats Surface-Level Defenses in Tool-Using Agents
  2. 2026NetInjectBench: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injection in Tool-Using Large Language Model Agents for Network Operations
  3. 2026ActGuard: Pre-execution Action Auditing against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents
  4. 2026Depth-Dependent Indirect Prompt Injection in Tool-Calling ReAct Agents: Injection Depth, Payload Framing, and Turn-Budget Sensitivity
  5. 2026Defense Against Indirect Prompt Injection via Tool Result Parsing
  6. 2026Silent Failures in Agentic Security Evaluation: A Validated Harness for Tool-Call Mediation Under Indirect Prompt Injection
  7. 2025Indirect Prompt Injections: Are Firewalls All You Need, or Stronger Benchmarks?
  8. 2026ROPE: Routed Origin Policy Enforcement against Indirect Prompt Injection