mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

ACLE-MCP: Attested Capability Leases for Execution-Time Trust in Remote LLM Tool Use

arXiv 2609.02690 ↗First posted 2 Sep 2026cs.CRcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Remote Model Context Protocol (MCP) services enable large language model agents to invoke external tools, but OAuth authorization alone does not ensure that a later tool call is executed by the provider-side workload that the relying party intended to trust. An endpoint may remain authorized even after execution shifts to a substituted workload, relies on stale appraisal state, reuses authority transferred from another sender, or traverses an undeclared downstream component. We call this problem the post-authorization execution trust gap. We present ACLE-MCP, an invocation-scoped architecture that couples delegated authorization, workload appraisal, and resource-side execution admission. For protected calls, ACLE-MCP issues a short-lived, sender-constrained capability lease that binds the expected workload, freshness requirement, operation, object and parameter bounds, downstream constraints, and receipt obligations. A provider-side Execution Gate consumes the lease immediately before protected tool logic begins. We implement a runnable prototype with Keycloak/OIDC validation, an MCP Python SDK server, and an optional vTPM quote-verification backend. Controlled security experiments and an agent tool-use extension show that weaker authorization or connect-time attestation modes leave distinct post-authorization attacks open, whereas full ACLE-MCP blocks all evaluated attack families while preserving all benign tasks. In the locally simulated agent extension, the complete design increases request-level pooled p95 latency on normal allowed calls by 25.7% relative to OAuth-only. These results indicate that invocation-time binding between call authority and current workload state is a practical complement to OAuth-protected remote tool use.

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 6 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Sep 2026.

Builds on

6 of 30 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025AgentSentinel: An End-to-End and Real-Time Security Defense Framework for Computer-Use Agents9 Sep
  2. 2025Prompt Injection Attack to Tool Selection in LLM Agents28 Apr
  3. 2025SAGA: A Security Architecture for Governing AI Agentic Systems27 Apr

Other references · 3

  1. 2025ACE: A Security Architecture for LLM-Integrated App Systemscited by 55
  2. 2023ACAI: Protecting Accelerator Execution with Arm Confidential Computing Architecturecited by 4
  3. 2025Transparent Attested DNS for Confidential Computing Servicescited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026From Tool Connection to Execution Control: Benchmarking Security Invariants in MCP-Style Agent Runtimes
  2. 2026Attested Tool-Server Admission: A Security Extension to the Model Context Protocol
  3. 2026Zero-Trust Authorization and Discovery for Enterprise MCP
  4. 2026Breaking the Protocol: Security Analysis of the Model Context Protocol Specification and Prompt Injection Vulnerabilities in Tool-Integrated LLM Agents
  5. 2026Give Them an Inch and They Will Take a Mile:Understanding and Measuring Caller Identity Confusion in MCP-Based AI Systems
  6. 2025MCP Security Bench (MSB): Benchmarking Attacks Against Model Context Protocol in LLM Agents
  7. 2026AIP: Agent Identity Protocol for Verifiable Delegation Across MCP and A2A
  8. 2026Capability Gates Are Not Authorization: Confused-Deputy Failures in LLM Agent Frameworks