mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Certified Multi-Source Integrity for Structured Agent Actions

arXiv 2609.34245 ↗First posted 28 Sep 2026cs.CR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents increasingly take privileged, often irreversible structured actions, such as paying an invoice. They assemble each action from action-critical fields in documents and tool outputs that an adversary can corrupt, and indirect prompt injection can drive the model itself to extract attacker-chosen values. Current defenses gate on a source's trust label or certify free-text answer quality. None certifies the integrity of a coupled, policy-bound structured action under a corruption budget that accounts for shared upstream sources. We characterize when such an action is safely certifiable and give the maximally live safe certifier. It admits an action only when each field clears the rule its evidence structure supports: a bounded corruption radius over corruption-distinct evidence classes, counted by a minimum hitting set so that re-publishing or laundered copies cannot manufacture a quorum, deterministic reconciliation for complementary fields, and a trusted anchor where the evidence leaves a field single-sourced. We formalize two robustness notions, validate each mechanism by ablation, and measure how often the multi-source precondition holds on sanctions designations (70,966 entities) and software supply-chain provenance (450 packages). Under upper-bound proxies, genuine corroboration is a minority phenomenon in both, and naive attestation counting overstates it, since witnesses that look independent collapse to two corruption-distinct domains once shared origin is counted. Across five current models in a real agent loop, a realistic injection fools every model but one and a naive agent then executes the fraudulent action on most attacks. The certifier admits no unsafe action and recovers the correct value where corroboration permits, while action-gating and provenance baselines are broken in every world of our harness by some attack in its space.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.

Builds on

12 of 17 references.

Closest ancestors · 10

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Aligning Provenance with Authorization: A Dual-Graph Defense for LLM Agents26 May
  2. 2026MemLineage: Lineage-Guided Enforcement for LLM Agent Memory14 May
  3. 2026ARGUS: Defending LLM Agents Against Context-Aware Prompt Injection5 May
  4. 2026Formal Policy Enforcement for Real-World Agentic Systems18 Feb
  5. 2025MemoryGraft: Persistent Compromise of LLM Agents via Poisoned Experience Retrieval18 Dec
  6. 2025Defeating Prompt Injections by Design24 Mar
  7. 2025Memory Injection Attacks on LLM Agents via Query-Only Interaction5 Mar
  8. 2025MELON: Provable Defense Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks in AI Agents7 Feb
  9. 2024The Task Shield: Enforcing Task Alignment to Defend Against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM Agents21 Dec
  10. 2024AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases17 Jul

Other references · 2

  1. 2024Certifiably Robust RAG against Retrieval Corruptioncited by 144
  2. 2025Securing AI Agents with Information-Flow Controlcited by 108

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Trust propagation and structural containment in Multi-agent LLM pipelines
  2. 2026The Granularity Mismatch in Agent Security: Argument-Level Provenance Solves Enforcement and Isolates the LLM Reasoning Bottleneck
  3. 2026Auditing Provenance Sensitivity in LLM Agent Action Selection
  4. 2026PACE: Provenance-Aware Capability Enforcement for Tool-Using LLM Agents
  5. 2026Rewriting the Response Path: Silent Tampering and Provider-Signed Defense in BYOK LLM Agents
  6. 2026Silence Is Endorsement: Verification-Status Laundering in LLM Agent Pipelines
  7. 2026Audit Without Verification: When LLM Accountability Layers Relay Rather Than Check
  8. 2026Conformity Breaks Conformal Prediction