Recognition Without Enforcement: Configuration-Dependent Failures in LLM Agent Instruction Arbitration and External Control
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28502v1
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2026 16:34:05 GMT
- Title: Recognition Without Enforcement: Configuration-Dependent Failures in LLM Agent Instruction Arbitration and External Control
- Abstract summary: LLM agents arbitrate among instructions from system prompts, users, memory, and tools, but this arbitration cannot be assumed to enforce trust boundaries.<n>We identify a recognition-enforcement gap: source-format features are linearly decodable from model activations, and models can explicitly identify forged authority when prompted.<n>We treat model self-arbitration as a capability rather than a security boundary and implement an external reference monitor combining authenticated source routing with capability-gated tool execution.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: LLM agents arbitrate among instructions from system prompts, users, memory, and tools, but this arbitration cannot be assumed to enforce trust boundaries. We identify a recognition-enforcement gap: source-format features (role-template position, channel metadata, formatting cues) are linearly decodable from model activations, and models can explicitly identify forged authority when prompted, yet some configurations still produce the conflicting tool call. We use "recognition" in this specific decodable-source-format-plus-verbalized-detection sense; crossed-probe controls show it is not a unified abstract trust representation. The gap is not an immutable property of model weights. Restrictive policies and diverse prompts can eliminate execution on the same models, while permissive configurations and particular prompt-model pairs yield deterministic failures. Across a fleet evaluation (authority spoofing: 46 model endpoints across 6 vendors including open-weight; memory conflict: 48 models), average execution under diverse novel attacks is 1.21% [0.5-2.1%] (model-clustered CI over 14,294 spoofed trials from 29 models), but vulnerability is concentrated in reproducible cells and shifts across deployment windows (up to 47pp within-window per-fingerprint range). Prompt-layer defenses likewise fail to generalize across models and adaptive formulations. We therefore treat model self-arbitration as a capability rather than a security boundary and implement an external reference monitor combining authenticated source routing with capability-gated tool execution. It deterministically rejects all tested forged, tampered, replayed, and unsigned requests while preserving legitimate operations. A separate adaptive red-team found one implementation flaw (a since-patched clock-skew admission), not a cryptographic bypass. Secure agents require external enforcement, not merely better recognition.
Related papers
- The Deception Delta: Adversarial Evaluation of LLM-Based Smart Contract Bytecode Forensics [0.0]
Large language models are increasingly used in blockchain forensic investigations.<n> adversarial deception reduces drain detection by 20.0 percentage points.<n>Models correctly describe the hidden drain mechanism but accept the contract's framing and dismiss it as benign.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-09-12T18:45:24Z) - ROPE: Routed Origin Policy Enforcement against Indirect Prompt Injection [61.4148196085256]
We present ROPE (Routed Origin Policy Enforcement), which is anchored in a structural notion of trust.<n>Our approach admits two provable guarantees: 1) at every step of a trajectory, no value whose only origin is attacker-writable content reaches an origin-guarded parameter, and 2) no rewording of an injection changes an admission decision.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-27T01:22:14Z) - LMSM: LLM Security Framework Inspired by Linux Security Modules [56.93644694627783]
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed with layered defenses, yet malicious prompts can still bypass them.<n>We present Language Model Security Modules (LMSM), a security framework that adapts the separation behind Linux Security Modules (LSM) to LLM serving.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-26T12:13:05Z) - Confidently Wrong, Silently So: Auditing Undetectable Failures of a Deployed On-Device Language Model [0.038379177968040606]
We present a reproducible reliability audit of the developer-accessible on-device foundation model.<n>We find a emphtask-asymmetric miscalibration: its guardrails fail in opposite directions across tasks.<n>We contribute a model-agnostic audit protocol, a surface-indistinguishability test, and released code and frozen evaluation items as reusable infrastructure for auditing deployed models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-24T16:55:09Z) - On the Inseparability of Instructions and Data in Shared-Embedding Sequence Models [0.0]
We formalize prompted systems as Prompted Action Models with control-authoritative actions.<n>We prove Semantic-Faithful Control (SFC) is unachievable within the shared pipeline.<n>We identify the root cause and the class of solution it demands.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-25T21:52:29Z) - CIAware-Bench: Benchmarking Control Intervention Awareness Across Frontier LLMs [100.38986535324284]
We introduce textbfCIAware-Bench, a benchmark for measuring textbfcontrol textbfintervention (CI) awareness across frontier models.<n>CIAware-Bench tests whether models can distinguish their own trajectories from those modified by a control intervention.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-09T16:24:16Z) - Pramana: A Protocol-Layer Treatment of Claim Verification in Autonomous Agent Networks [0.0]
Production verification today splits into two halves: Probabilistic verdict patterns (self-consistency voting, reviewer LLM ensembles) produce judgments, not artifacts.<n>Pramana defines the missing wire format. Every consequential agent output is wrapped in a typed ClaimAttestation with one of four variants.<n>Pramana exhaustively verified under TLC across three symmetry-reduced models: 38,563 distinct reachable states, zero invariant violations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-19T17:00:33Z) - The Misattribution Gap: When Memory Poisoning Looks Like Model Failure in Agentic AI Systems [1.0262304700896199]
We formalize emphSemantic Norm Drift (SND) as a third path to agent misconduct.<n>In SND, a policy-formatted document enters a shared vector store through normal uploads and later reappears as trusted system context.<n>Counterfactual Composition Testing identifies the causal entry with 87.5% accuracy and zero false positives.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-12T20:21:47Z) - SWAP: Towards Copyright Auditing of Soft Prompts via Sequential Watermarking [58.475471437150674]
We propose sequential watermarking for soft prompts (SWAP)<n>SWAP encodes watermarks through a specific order of defender-specified out-of-distribution classes.<n>Experiments on 11 datasets demonstrate SWAP's effectiveness, harmlessness, and robustness against potential adaptive attacks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-05T13:48:48Z) - Every Step Counts: Decoding Trajectories as Authorship Fingerprints of dLLMs [63.82840470917859]
We show that the decoding mechanism of dLLMs can be used as a powerful tool for model attribution.<n>We propose a novel information extraction scheme called the Directed Decoding Map (DDM), which captures structural relationships between decoding steps and better reveals model-specific behaviors.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-02T06:25:10Z) - Model Pairing Using Embedding Translation for Backdoor Attack Detection on Open-Set Classification Tasks [63.269788236474234]
We propose to use model pairs on open-set classification tasks for detecting backdoors.
We show that this score, can be an indicator for the presence of a backdoor despite models being of different architectures.
This technique allows for the detection of backdoors on models designed for open-set classification tasks, which is little studied in the literature.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-28T21:29:16Z)
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.