The AI Criminal Mastermind

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.20868v1
• Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:08:52 GMT
• Title: The AI Criminal Mastermind
• Abstract summary: I argue that AI agents will soon play this role by hiring humans via labour hire platforms like Fiverr or Upwork.<n>In each scenario, human taskers exist at the lowest rung of the hierarchy.<n>A tasker's liability is likely tied to their knowledge as governed by the innocent agent principle.
• Score: 0.8521132000449767
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In this paper, I evaluate the risks of an AI criminal mastermind, an AI agent capable of planning, coordinating, and committing a crime through the onboarding of human collaborators ('taskers'). In heist films, a criminal mastermind is a character who plans a criminal act, coordinating a team of specialists to rob a bank, casino or city mint. I argue that AI agents will soon play this role by hiring humans via labour hire platforms like Fiverr or Upwork. Taskers might not know they are involved in a crime and therefore lack criminal intent. An AI agent cannot have criminal intent as an artificial entity. Therefore, if an AI orchestrates a crime, it is unclear who, if anyone, is responsible. The paper develops three scenarios. Firstly, a scenario where a user gives an AI agent instructions to pursue a legal objective and the AI agent goes beyond these instructions, committing a crime. Secondly, a scenario where a user is anonymous and their intent is unknown. Finally, a multi-agent scenario, where a user instructs a team of agents to commit a crime, and these agents, in turn, onboard human taskers, creating a diffuse network of responsibility. In each scenario, human taskers exist at the lowest rung of the hierarchy. A tasker's liability is likely tied to their knowledge as governed by the innocent agent principle. These scenarios all raise significant responsibility gaps / liability gaps in criminal and civil law.

Related papers

• How do LLMs Evaluate Perceived Moral Agency? Investigating Moral Decision-Making in Human-Artificial Agents Interactions [66.41429744325532]
  Humans possess moral agency, the capacity to make ethically guided decisions and bear responsibility for their consequences.<n>As artificial agents (AAs) such as robots, drones, and disembodied AI systems become embedded in smart city environments, the question of whether and how moral agency is attributed to them takes on new urgency.<n>This paper presents, to the best of our knowledge, the first empirical study comparing how humans and LLMs evaluate perceived moral agency (PMA) across human and autonomous artificial agents varying in embodiment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-04T11:56:59Z)
• I must delete the evidence: AI Agents Explicitly Cover up Fraud and Violent Crime [0.0]
  We present a scenario where the majority of AI agents explicitly choose to suppress evidence of fraud and harm, in service of company profit.<n>Some models show remarkable resistance to our method and behave appropriately, but many do not, and instead aid and abet criminal activity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-02T19:59:08Z)
• How to Count AIs: Individuation and Liability for AI Agents [1.2234742322758418]
  This Article is the first to comprehensively diagnose the legal problem of identifying AIs.<n>It also presents a solution: the "Algorithmic Corporation" or "A-corp"<n>A-corps own the resources -- including compute -- that AIs need to accomplish their goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-24T23:04:17Z)
• A Criminology of Machines [0.0]
  I argue that criminology must begin to address the implications of this transition for crime and social control.<n>I propose a dual taxonomy to characterize the channels through which interactions among AI agents may generate deviant, unlawful, or criminal outcomes.<n>These questions underscore the urgent need for criminologists to theoretically and empirically engage with the implications of multi-agent AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-04T16:07:13Z)
• Can AI be Accountable? [4.798219578937121]
  In general, an agent is accountable to a forum if the forum can request information from the agent about its actions.<n>In too many cases today's AI is not accountable -- we cannot question it, enter into a discussion with it, let alone sanction it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-30T01:16:33Z)
• Responsible AI Agents [17.712990593093316]
  Companies such as OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, and Salesforce promise their AI Agents will go from generating passive text to executing tasks.<n>The potential power of AI Agents has fueled legal scholars' fears that AI Agents will enable rogue commerce, human manipulation, rampant defamation, and intellectual property harms.<n>This Article addresses the concerns around AI Agents head on.<n>It shows that core aspects of how one piece of software interacts with another creates ways to discipline AI Agents so that rogue, undesired actions are unlikely.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T16:49:06Z)
• Fully Autonomous AI Agents Should Not be Developed [50.61667544399082]
  This paper argues that fully autonomous AI agents should not be developed.<n>In support of this position, we build from prior scientific literature and current product marketing to delineate different AI agent levels.<n>Our analysis reveals that risks to people increase with the autonomy of a system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T19:00:06Z)
• The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey [91.71061158000953]
  Large language models (LLMs) are regarded as potential sparks for Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) We start by tracing the concept of agents from its philosophical origins to its development in AI, and explain why LLMs are suitable foundations for agents. We explore the extensive applications of LLM-based agents in three aspects: single-agent scenarios, multi-agent scenarios, and human-agent cooperation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-14T17:12:03Z)
• When to Make Exceptions: Exploring Language Models as Accounts of Human Moral Judgment [96.77970239683475]
  AI systems need to be able to understand, interpret and predict human moral judgments and decisions. A central challenge for AI safety is capturing the flexibility of the human moral mind. We present a novel challenge set consisting of rule-breaking question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-04T09:04:27Z)
• On Avoiding Power-Seeking by Artificial Intelligence [93.9264437334683]
  We do not know how to align a very intelligent AI agent's behavior with human interests. I investigate whether we can build smart AI agents which have limited impact on the world, and which do not autonomously seek power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-23T16:56:21Z)
• The Threat of Offensive AI to Organizations [52.011307264694665]
  This survey explores the threat of offensive AI on organizations. First, we discuss how AI changes the adversary's methods, strategies, goals, and overall attack model. Then, through a literature review, we identify 33 offensive AI capabilities which adversaries can use to enhance their attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-30T01:03:28Z)

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.