mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AgentFlow: A Flow-Centric Policy Language and Framework for Securing LLM Agent Systems

arXiv 2608.22868 ↗First posted 24 Aug 2026cs.CRcited by 2

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

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents increasingly read untrusted content, invoke external tools, access private data, and delegate work to other agents. Harm often arises not from a single unsafe action but from the flow of sensitive data across a sequence of otherwise plausible steps. We present AgentFlow, a flow-centric policy language and runtime enforcement model for specifying where data may travel in agent systems. Policies are defined over labeled runtime edges and constrain which tools may receive sensitive fields, which sinks may receive released data, and what authority may cross delegation boundaries. The language supports flow and path rules, task-scoped capabilities, controlled release, and stateful taint semantics. A runtime reference monitor mediates agent actions, and a bounded SMT-based verifier checks safety properties for a structured policy fragment. We evaluate AgentFlow on multiple agent benchmarks. In our prototype, seven safety properties verify in under 0.5 seconds each, and the verifier catches all seeded unsafe policy variants in our study. On 949 AgentDojo injected cases across four suites, AgentFlow reduces confirmed compromise from 33.0% to 0.0% while improving aggregate utility from 46.7% to 63.3%. On a 200-case AgentDyn Dailylife benchmark, it reduces confirmed compromise from 73.5% to 0.0% while preserving near-baseline utility (44.5% to 43.5%). Breadth checks across ASB, InjecAgent, BIPIA, AgentHarm, and MCPTox replays suggest that the configured policies block the benchmark-specified policy-visible attacker flows; in ASB's direct-prompt-injection harness, attack success is 0/1,200. These results are preliminary and scoped to the modeled policy-visible agent behaviors and evaluated benchmarks.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 30 of its 65 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Aug 2026.

Builds on

30 of 65 references.

Closest ancestors · 16

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026The Attack and Defense Landscape of Agentic AI: A Comprehensive Survey11 Mar
  2. 2026Formal Policy Enforcement for Real-World Agentic Systems18 Feb
  3. 2026Taming Various Privilege Escalation in LLM-Based Agent Systems: A Mandatory Access Control Framework17 Jan
  4. 2025ObliInjection: Order-Oblivious Prompt Injection Attack to LLM Agents with Multi-source Data10 Dec
  5. 2025AgentArmor: Enforcing Program Analysis on Agent Runtime Trace to Defend Against Prompt Injection2 Aug
  6. 2025PromptArmor: Simple yet Effective Prompt Injection Defenses21 Jul
  7. 2025Prompt Injection Attack to Tool Selection in LLM Agents28 Apr
  8. 2025WASP: Benchmarking Web Agent Security Against Prompt Injection Attacks22 Apr
  9. 2025Defeating Prompt Injections by Design24 Mar
  10. 2025Prompt Flow Integrity to Prevent Privilege Escalation in LLM Agents17 Mar
  11. 2025A Survey on Trustworthy LLM Agents: Threats and Countermeasures12 Mar
  12. 2024AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents11 Oct
4 more
  1. 2024Prompt Infection: LLM-to-LLM Prompt Injection within Multi-Agent Systems9 Oct
  2. 2024Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents3 Oct
  3. 2024AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases17 Jul
  4. 2024InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agents5 Mar

Other references · 14

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  2. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
  3. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
  4. 2023The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Surveycited by 1,439
  5. 2023Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defensescited by 364
  6. 2025Model Context Protocol (MCP): Landscape, Security Threats, and Future Research Directionscited by 265
  7. 2023Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 264
  8. 2025Securing AI Agents with Information-Flow Controlcited by 121
  9. 2024ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stagescited by 82
  10. 2025Open Challenges in Multi-Agent Security: Towards Secure Systems of Interacting AI Agentscited by 71
  11. 2025Contextual Agent Security: A Policy for Every Purposecited by 59
  12. 2024Cedar: A New Language for Expressive, Fast, Safe, and Analyzable Authorization (Extended Version)cited by 34
2 more
  1. 2025Towards Automating Data Access Permissions in AI Agentscited by 21
  2. 2024How We Built Cedar: A Verification-Guided Approachcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025SAFEFLOW: A Principled Protocol for Trustworthy and Transactional Autonomous Agent Systems
  2. 2026Agentao: A Policy-Governed Runtime Harness for Embeddable Tool-Using LLM Agents
  3. 2026ActGov: Governing LLM Agent Actions via Policy-Constrained Validation
  4. 2026APPA: Recoverable Information-Flow Control for Real-World LLM Agents
  5. 2026OpenAgentFlow: Enabling System-Wide Safety Boundaries for Heterogeneous AI Agent Fleets
  6. 2025AgentGuard: Repurposing Agentic Orchestrator for Safety Evaluation of Tool Orchestration
  7. 2026Securing LLM Agents Need Intent-to-Execution Integrity
  8. 2026Toward Safe LLM Agents: A Survey of Specification, Verification, and Enforcement