The Vulnerability With No CVE: Managing Persistent Gaps Between Mandate and Authority in AI Coding Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.05884v1
• Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2026 11:06:06 GMT
• Title: The Vulnerability With No CVE: Managing Persistent Gaps Between Mandate and Authority in AI Coding Agents
• Abstract summary: We propose the agentic posture vulnerability (APV) as a task-conditioned-management abstraction.<n>APV operationalizes existing excessive-agency, authorization, and control-composition weaknesses.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Existing guidance identifies excessive agency, excessive permission, weak task-bound authorization, and inadequate agent controls as important risks. Control frameworks also describe capabilities for constraining, authorizing, observing, validating, and responding to agent activity. Yet security programs still need a way to manage persistent deployed instances that span components and outlive any one event. We propose the agentic posture vulnerability (APV) as a task-conditioned vulnerability-management abstraction: a durable record for a composed agent-control exposure. One posture may produce different runtime manifestations across tasks; APV links those manifestations to the invariant posture and remains open until authority is narrowed, a missing control is added, risk is accepted, or closure is verified. APV is not proposed as a new root-cause class of risk; it operationalizes existing excessive-agency, authorization, and control-composition weaknesses. We distinguish APVs from CVE-addressable product defects, OWASP Excessive Agency, Agent Baseline control outcomes, and the runtime authorization-execution gap. We then provide a field vignette, a thresholded definition, six recurring APV patterns, a vulnerability lifecycle, a minimum record, a control-and-closure matrix, tooling implications, and a testable research agenda.

Related papers

• Securing Agentic AI: From Per-Action Checks to Trajectory Assurance [8.523545468742919]
  As large language model (LLM)-based agents become more autonomous, securing them evolves from a single challenge into a broad and interconnected landscape spanning the entire agentic stack.<n>Perhaps the most fundamental challenge is behavioral containment: sequences of individually permissible actions may collectively violate system-level constraints and safety invariants.<n>At the broader level, supply-chain integrity, provenance, accountability, and end-to-end observability remain largely open problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T00:28:49Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Embodied Intelligence: A Systems Framework and Graded Trustworthiness Levels [53.63220028820581]
  Embodied intelligence integrates learned perception and decision making with real-time computation, control, and physical interaction.<n>We define trustworthy embodied intelligence as the sustained capacity to execute specified tasks reliably.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-28T17:50:44Z)
• Operational Hallucination and Safety Drift in AI Agents [0.3823356975862005]
  Large language models (LLMs) serving as planners in tool-using autonomous agents introduce dynamic reliability risks in multi-turn execution.<n>This paper empirically characterizes two observed failure modes across multiple state-of-the-art LLMs: Safety Drift and Operational Hallucination.<n>We propose an Action-Aware Supervision Layer - a lightweight, plug-and-play architectural blueprint incorporating intent-action consistency checks, state tracking, and forced termination primitives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-20T17:01:50Z)
• AgentLens: Interpretable Safety Steering via Mechanistic Subspaces for Multi-Turn Coding Agent [53.82005364479556]
  Coding agents based on large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable autonomous capabilities.<n>Existing safety mechanisms mainly rely on external guardrails.<n>We propose AgentLens, a white-box defense framework that performs runtime safety detection and representation-level mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-21T21:13:55Z)
• Position: AI Safety Requires Effective Controllability [7.789894640525689]
  We argue that AI safety requires controllability as a first-class objective.<n>Experiments with OpenClaw-based agents show that current alignment and guardrail mechanisms reduce risk, but often fail to provide persistent, authoritative, and enforceable runtime control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-26T14:53:24Z)
• The Authorization-Execution Gap Is a Major Safety and Security Problem in Open-World Agents [111.54911637435269]
  The Authorization-Execution Gap (AEG) is a major safety and security problem in open-world agents.<n>The AEG is the divergence between what a principal intends to authorize and what an open-world agent ultimately executes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-10T04:05:31Z)
• CORA: Conformal Risk-Controlled Agents for Safeguarded Mobile GUI Automation [68.53387633351484]
  We propose CORA (COnformal Risk-controlled GUI Agent), a post-policy, pre-action safeguarding framework that provides statistical guarantees on harmful executed actions.<n> CORA reformulates safety as selective action execution: we train a Guardian model to estimate action-conditional risk for each proposed step.<n>To rigorously evaluate this paradigm, we introduce Phone-Harm, a new benchmark of mobile safety violations with step-level harm labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-10T09:41:21Z)
• Governance-Constrained Agentic AI: Blockchain-Enforced Human Oversight for Safety-Critical Wildfire Monitoring [0.0]
  This paper provides a governance-conscious agentic AI architecture of trusted wildfire early warning.<n>The monitoring of wildfires is modeled as a constrained partially observable Markov decision process.<n>We build formal assurances such as integrity of alerts, human control, non-repudiation and limited detection latency assumptions of Byzantine fault.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-05T21:07:21Z)
• Execution-State-Aware LLM Reasoning for Automated Proof-of-Vulnerability Generation [36.950993500170014]
  We present DrillAgent, an agentic framework that reformulates PoV generation as an iterative hypothesis-verification-refinement process.<n>We evaluate DrillAgent on SEC-bench, a large-scale benchmark of real-world C/C++ vulnerabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-14T03:17:27Z)
• Aegis: Towards Governance, Integrity, and Security of AI Voice Agents [52.7512082818639]
  We propose Aegis, a framework for the governance, integrity, and security of voice agents.<n>We evaluate the framework through case studies in banking call centers, IT Support, and logistics.<n>We observe systematic differences across model families, with open-weight models exhibiting higher susceptibility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-07T05:51:36Z)
• CaMeLs Can Use Computers Too: System-level Security for Computer Use Agents [60.98294016925157]
  AI agents are vulnerable to prompt injection attacks, where malicious content hijacks agent behavior to steal credentials or cause financial loss.<n>We introduce Single-Shot Planning for CUAs, where a trusted planner generates a complete execution graph with conditional branches before any observation of potentially malicious content.<n>Although this architectural isolation successfully prevents instruction injections, we show that additional measures are needed to prevent Branch Steering attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-14T23:06:35Z)

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.