arXiv:2608.00718cs.CRcs.AI2026-08中稿 · the 2026 IEEE Glob…

多智能体大模型流水线存在结构漏洞,易遭内容注入等攻击。

Adversarial Attacks in Multi-Agent LLM Pipelines: Unveiling Structural Vulnerabilities in Agentic AI Architectures

论文配图:Adversarial Attacks in Multi-Agent LLM Pipelines: Unveiling Structural Vulnerabilities in Agentic AI Architectures
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 引入边界验证机制,确保跨智能体数据的安全性
  • 实测显示攻击成功率取决于流水线结构而非模型能力
  • 适合关注智能体系统安全的开发者与研究者

多智能体大模型流水线将多个专用语言模型智能体组织成结构化工作流,中间输出在智能体间传递以解决复杂任务。这种设计引入了单智能体场景中不存在的安全缺口:一旦某个智能体接收恶意内容,该内容将以可信输入形式在整个流水线中传播。我们认为,这一漏洞源于缺乏边界验证——一种在跨智能体边界强制执行数据内容、身份、执行意图和状态完整性验证的安全机制。缺少此类验证时,现代流水线隐含信任假设,不具备对抗性鲁棒性,从而形成结构性攻击面(如内容注入、智能体冒充、计划偏离、记忆污染)。基于GAIA与SWE-Bench基准的标注生产轨迹,我们发现这些漏洞存在于正常部署中,并且广泛逃逸现有评估框架。我们在受控多智能体环境中实现这些失效模式,并在相同流水线配置下对GPT-5-mini、Claude Sonnet 4.5和Kimi K2.5进行评估。结果表明,攻击成功率与流水线结构相关,而非模型能力,说明对抗性脆弱性本质上是架构属性,推动向流水线级防御转变。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Multi-agent LLM pipelines orchestrate multiple specialized language model agents into structured workflows where intermediate outputs are passed across agents to solve complex tasks. This design introduces a security gap absent in single-agent settings: once an agent accepts adversarial content, it is propagated as trusted input throughout the pipeline. We argue that this vulnerability stems from the absence of boundary verification, a security primitive that enforces explicit validation of data as it crosses inter-agent boundaries, including content, identity, execution intent, and state integrity. Without such verification, modern pipelines embed implicit trust assumptions that are not adversarially robust, giving rise to structurally distinct attack surfaces (e.g., content injection, agent impersonation, plan deviation, and memory poisoning). Leveraging annotated production traces from the GAIA and SWE-Bench benchmark, we show that these vulnerabilities arise in benign deployments and largely evade existing evaluation frameworks. We further operationalize these failure modes within a controlled multi-agent setting and evaluate them across GPT-5-mini, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and Kimi K2.5 under identical pipeline configurations. The results reveal that attack success aligns with pipeline structure rather than model capability, indicating that adversarial vulnerability is fundamentally an architectural property and motivating a shift toward pipeline-level defenses.

多智能体安全漏洞大模型对抗攻击

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。