# CAITLYN: Can LLM Agents Autonomously Synthesize Defenses against Emerging Injection Attacks?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.27990 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.27990/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 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 35 of its 49 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 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, 30 of 35)

- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.08155/) (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)
- [MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08560/) (2023)
- [AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03688/) (2023)
- [Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06674/) (2023)
- [Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.09527/) (2022)
- [InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02691/) (2024)
- [The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13208/) (2024)
- ["Do Anything Now": Characterizing and Evaluating In-The-Wild Jailbreak Prompts on Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03825/) (2023)
- [AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12784/) (2024)
- [StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06363/) (2024)
- [Agent Security Bench (ASB): Formalizing and Benchmarking Attacks and Defenses in LLM-based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02644/) (2024)
- [NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Rails](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10501/) (2023)
- [Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12815/) (2023)
- [Defeating Prompt Injections by Design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.18813/) (2025)
- [Poisoning Language Models During Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.00944/) (2023)
- [PoisonedRAG: Knowledge Corruption Attacks to Retrieval-Augmented Generation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.07867/) (2024)
- [Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks With Spotlighting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.14720/) (2024)
- [SecAlign: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05451/) (2024)
- [Tensor Trust: Interpretable Prompt Injection Attacks from an Online Game](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.01011/) (2023)
- [DataSentinel: A Game-Theoretic Detection of Prompt Injection Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.11358/) (2025)
- [IsolateGPT: An Execution Isolation Architecture for LLM-Based Agentic Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04960/) (2024)
- [ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10753/) (2024)
- [Model Context Protocol (MCP) at First Glance: Studying the Security and Maintainability of MCP Servers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.13538/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [SINGED: Correct Outputs Do Not Certify Safe Execution in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.35889/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Prompt injection attacks on Large Language Model (LLM) agents seek to introduce malicious instructions or content into external text sources retrieved by agents, forcing the underlying LLMs to execute harmful actions outside their benign scope. While current defenses effectively counter known injection attacks, deploying them in LLM agent environments remains challenging due to attack variants and emerging threats. Moreover, existing solutions typically suffer from an inherent trilemma, i.e., a constant trade-off among runtime efficiency, contextual precision, and adaptability. To bridge this gap, we propose Continuous Agents for Injection Threats via Lifelong Yielding Nexus (CAITLYN), an agent-agnostic defense middleware. CAITLYN integrates two systems. System I focuses on immediate defense against existing attacks using a two-tiered library: Tier-0 for rule-based detection scripts and Tier-1 for optimized LLM-based accurate inference. System II, in contrast, is deployed to monitor potential abnormal signals and attempt to synthesize new defenses. On standard benchmarks, CAITLYN matches the detection performance of state-of-the-art defenses at lower token overhead than LLM-as-a-judge baselines. On Emerging, our new delivery-aware benchmark featuring novel injection techniques, static baselines and the standalone System I configuration remain vulnerable. In contrast, System II autonomously synthesizes verified defense capabilities, substantially lowering the attack success rate across three diverse agent environments.