MI9 -- Agent Intelligence Protocol: Runtime Governance for Agentic AI Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.03858v1
• Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2025 19:15:09 GMT
• Title: MI9 -- Agent Intelligence Protocol: Runtime Governance for Agentic AI Systems
• Authors: Charles L. Wang, Trisha Singhal, Ameya Kelkar, Jason Tuo,
• Abstract summary: We introduce MI9, the first fully integrated runtime governance framework for safety and alignment of agentic AI systems.<n>MI9 introduces real-time controls through six integrated components: agency-risk index, agent-semantic telemetry capture, continuous authorization monitoring, Finite-State-Machine (FSM)-based conformance engines, goal-conditioned drift detection, and graduated containment strategies.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Agentic AI systems capable of reasoning, planning, and executing actions present fundamentally distinct governance challenges compared to traditional AI models. Unlike conventional AI, these systems exhibit emergent and unexpected behaviors during runtime, introducing novel agent-related risks that cannot be fully anticipated through pre-deployment governance alone. To address this critical gap, we introduce MI9, the first fully integrated runtime governance framework designed specifically for safety and alignment of agentic AI systems. MI9 introduces real-time controls through six integrated components: agency-risk index, agent-semantic telemetry capture, continuous authorization monitoring, Finite-State-Machine (FSM)-based conformance engines, goal-conditioned drift detection, and graduated containment strategies. Operating transparently across heterogeneous agent architectures, MI9 enables the systematic, safe, and responsible deployment of agentic systems in production environments where conventional governance approaches fall short, providing the foundational infrastructure for safe agentic AI deployment at scale. Detailed analysis through a diverse set of scenarios demonstrates MI9's systematic coverage of governance challenges that existing approaches fail to address, establishing the technical foundation for comprehensive agentic AI oversight.

Related papers

• SafeMobile: Chain-level Jailbreak Detection and Automated Evaluation for Multimodal Mobile Agents [58.21223208538351]
  This work explores the security issues surrounding mobile multimodal agents.<n>It attempts to construct a risk discrimination mechanism by incorporating behavioral sequence information.<n>It also designs an automated assisted assessment scheme based on a large language model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-01T15:10:00Z)
• TRiSM for Agentic AI: A Review of Trust, Risk, and Security Management in LLM-based Agentic Multi-Agent Systems [2.462408812529728]
  This review presents a structured analysis of textbfTrust, Risk, and Security Management (TRiSM) in the context of LLM-based Agentic Multi-Agent Systems (AMAS)<n>We begin by examining the conceptual foundations of Agentic AI and highlight its architectural distinctions from traditional AI agents.<n>We then adapt and extend the AI TRiSM framework for Agentic AI, structured around four key pillars: Explainability, ModelOps, Security, Privacy and Governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-04T16:26:11Z)
• LLM Agents Should Employ Security Principles [60.03651084139836]
  This paper argues that the well-established design principles in information security should be employed when deploying Large Language Model (LLM) agents at scale.<n>We introduce AgentSandbox, a conceptual framework embedding these security principles to provide safeguards throughout an agent's life-cycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T21:39:08Z)
• A Novel Zero-Trust Identity Framework for Agentic AI: Decentralized Authentication and Fine-Grained Access Control [7.228060525494563]
  This paper posits the imperative for a novel Agentic AI IAM framework.<n>We propose a comprehensive framework built upon rich, verifiable Agent Identities (IDs)<n>We also explore how Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) enable privacy-preserving attribute disclosure and verifiable policy compliance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-25T20:21:55Z)
• Threat Modeling for AI: The Case for an Asset-Centric Approach [0.23408308015481666]
  AI systems now able to autonomously execute code, interact with external systems, and operate without human oversight.<n>With AI systems now able to autonomously execute code, interact with external systems, and operate without human oversight, traditional security approaches fall short.<n>This paper introduces an asset-centric methodology for threat modeling AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-08T18:57:08Z)
• Enterprise-Grade Security for the Model Context Protocol (MCP): Frameworks and Mitigation Strategies [0.0]
  The Model Context Protocol (MCP) provides a standardized framework for artificial intelligence (AI) systems to interact with external data sources and tools in real-time.<n>This paper builds upon foundational research into MCP architecture and preliminary security assessments to deliver enterprise-grade mitigation frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T15:25:58Z)
• Inherent and emergent liability issues in LLM-based agentic systems: a principal-agent perspective [0.0]
  Agentic systems powered by large language models (LLMs) are becoming progressively more complex and capable.<n>Their increasing agency and expanding deployment settings attract growing attention to effective governance policies, monitoring, and control protocols.<n>We analyze potential liability issues arising from the delegated use of LLM agents and their extended systems through a principal-agent perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-04T08:10:02Z)
• AI threats to national security can be countered through an incident regime [55.2480439325792]
  We propose a legally mandated post-deployment AI incident regime that aims to counter potential national security threats from AI systems.<n>Our proposed AI incident regime is split into three phases. The first phase revolves around a novel operationalization of what counts as an 'AI incident'<n>The second and third phases spell out that AI providers should notify a government agency about incidents, and that the government agency should be involved in amending AI providers' security and safety procedures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-25T17:51:50Z)
• In-House Evaluation Is Not Enough: Towards Robust Third-Party Flaw Disclosure for General-Purpose AI [93.33036653316591]
  We call for three interventions to advance system safety.<n>First, we propose using standardized AI flaw reports and rules of engagement for researchers.<n>Second, we propose GPAI system providers adopt broadly-scoped flaw disclosure programs.<n>Third, we advocate for the development of improved infrastructure to coordinate distribution of flaw reports.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T05:09:46Z)
• Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents [61.33974108405561]
  We introduce the Agent-as-a-Judge framework, wherein agentic systems are used to evaluate agentic systems. This is an organic extension of the LLM-as-a-Judge framework, incorporating agentic features that enable intermediate feedback for the entire task-solving process. We present DevAI, a new benchmark of 55 realistic automated AI development tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:57:02Z)
• Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress [171.05448842016125]
  We describe risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems. There is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them. Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T17:59:06Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.