mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

What Guides the Agent? Adjudicating Unauthorized Behavior via Localizing Behavior-Guiding Instructions

arXiv 2608.24022 ↗First posted 25 Aug 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 1

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

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents integrated with external resources gain complex task capabilities, yet the unified natural-language context channel makes them vulnerable to injection attacks: untrusted external data may be dynamically parsed as behavior-guiding instructions during LLM inference, thereby subverting the agent's decision. Existing defenses focus on static detection or isolation of malicious content at the input/output level, remains insufficient for detecting such dynamic inducements that arise during model reasoning. We propose Attnlocate, a runtime framework for fine-grained localization of context spans that genuinely influence tool-calling decisions, i.e., behavior-guiding instructions. Attnlocate casts this localization problem as an object detection task, aiming to detect the distinctive activation traces induced by behavior-guiding instructions within the attention matrix. Specifically, we design a multi-head, multi-layer attention aggregation scheme to construct a token-level feature space tailored for object detection. Then, a 1-D U-Net equipped with an anchor-free detection head is deployed to detect these spans. Finally, based on the authority of the provider from which the detected behavior-guiding spans originate, Attnlocate dynamically adjudicates malicious invocation attempts. We evaluate Attnlocate across ten agent configurations from five LLM families, covering scenarios involving indirect prompt injection and tool poisoning. Attnlocate achieves a mean IoU of 0.743, an average AUROC of 0.956, and a 0.934 true-positive rate at 0.067 false-positive rate. It also transfers effectively across unseen models and supports authority policy adaptation without retraining.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 17 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2026.

Builds on

17 of 23 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026ClawGuard: A Runtime Security Framework for Tool-Augmented LLM Agents Against Indirect Prompt Injection13 Apr
  2. 2025Automatic Red Teaming LLM-based Agents with Model Context Protocol Tools25 Sep
  3. 2025MindGuard: Intrinsic Decision Inspection for Securing LLM Agents Against Metadata Poisoning28 Aug
  4. 2025Progent: Securing AI Agents with Privilege Control16 Apr
  5. 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents24 Mar

Other references · 12

  1. 2019FCOS: Fully Convolutional One-Stage Object Detectioncited by 1,573
  2. 2019Generalized Intersection over Union: A Metric and A Loss for Bounding Box Regressioncited by 1,361
  3. 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agentscited by 956
  4. 2020Quantifying Attention Flow in Transformerscited by 759
  5. 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queriescited by 325
  6. 2024ContextCite: Attributing Model Generation to Contextcited by 93
  7. 2025ACE: A Security Architecture for LLM-Integrated App Systemscited by 52
  8. 2025MCIP: Protecting MCP Safety via Model Contextual Integrity Protocolcited by 33
  9. 2023An In-depth Survey of Large Language Model-based Artificial Intelligence Agentscited by 30
  10. 2025Defending Against Prompt Injection with DataFiltercited by 30
  11. 2025TracLLM: A Generic Framework for Attributing Long Context LLMscited by 11
  12. 2025AttnTrace: Contextual Attribution of Prompt Injection and Knowledge Corruptioncited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Detecting Malicious Agent Skills in the Wild using Attention
  2. 2026Agent-ToM: Learning to Monitor Autonomous LLM Agents via Theory-of-Mind Reasoning
  3. 2026RouteGuard: Internal-Signal Detection of Skill Poisoning in LLM Agents
  4. 2026Passing the Test You Trained On: Re-evaluating Prompt-Injection Detectors for LLM Agents
  5. 2026ActGuard: Pre-execution Action Auditing against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents
  6. 2026AttriGuard: Defeating Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents via Causal Attribution of Tool Invocations
  7. 2026ARGUS: Defending LLM Agents Against Context-Aware Prompt Injection
  8. 2025IPIGuard: A Novel Tool Dependency Graph-Based Defense Against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents