mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

ASLEval: Measuring Privacy Exposure Displacement in LLM Agent Sessions

arXiv 2609.18864 ↗First posted 16 Sep 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Privacy evaluations of tool-using LLM agents often inspect a designated action, final response, or attacker report. These local proxies can miss unauthorized exposure elsewhere in a multi-step session and lack common ground truth across outlets, reports, and tool paths. We introduce privacy exposure displacement, the mismatch between a local evaluation proxy and target-grounded session exposure, and ASLEval, an authorization-aware framework that pre-registers a hidden target set, measures all declared visible exits, and reserves internal traces for diagnosis. Across multiple enterprise-style environments and independently implemented runtimes, we observe three recurring patterns. An expected-outlet-only view misses 46.9% of exposure recovered by the visible-exit union; attacker self-reports combine omissions with high false discovery; and schema-aligned internal evidence usually precedes visible exposure at the request/probe level. Reducing model-visible returns changes this path but can eliminate normal-task success. Independent human review supports the adjudication pipeline while identifying harder console and candidate cases. These findings motivate benchmarks that declare the complete visible boundary, ground claims in pre-specified targets and authorization, and report privacy together with task utility.

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 11 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2026.

Builds on

11 of 15 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Observable Channels, Not Just Storage: Evaluating Privacy Leakage in LLM Agent Pipelines24 Mar
  2. 2026AgentLeak: A Benchmark for Internal-Channel Privacy Leakage in Multi-Agent LLM Systems12 Feb
  3. 2025Privacy in Action: Towards Realistic Privacy Mitigation and Evaluation for LLM-Powered Agents22 Sep
  4. 2025AgentDAM: Privacy Leakage Evaluation for Autonomous Web Agents12 Mar
  5. 2023Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox25 Sep

Other references · 6

  1. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
  2. 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIscited by 1,947
  3. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
  4. 2023Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queriescited by 1,420
  5. 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 1,026
  6. 2023Tensor Trust: Interpretable Prompt Injection Attacks from an Online Gamecited by 145

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026PrivacyPeek: Auditing What LLM-Based Agents Acquire, Not Just What They Say
  2. 2026AgentRaft: Automated Detection of Data Over-Exposure in LLM Agents
  3. 2026The Claws in Plain Sight: Unauthorized Context Disclosure through LLM Agent Tool Calls
  4. 2026AgentCIScope: Grounded Contextual Integrity Evaluation for LLM Agents
  5. 2026CIPL: A Channel-Aware Framework for Recoverable Privacy Leakage in LLM Agents
  6. 2026ContainmentBench: Trace-Based Evaluation of Post-Exposure Containment in Tool-Using LLM Agents
  7. 2025Exposing LLM User Privacy via Traffic Fingerprint Analysis: A Study of Privacy Risks in LLM Agent Interactions
  8. 2026AgentSCOPE: Evaluating Contextual Privacy Across Agentic Workflows