cs.CRAug 21, 2026

Explainable Adaptive Zero Trust Framework for AWS with Adversarial Robustness Evaluation

Authors: Om Singh, Yagyaraj Pandey, Nandini Pathak

Organizations: Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Abstract

Cloud environments built on Amazon Web Services face a structural security vulnerability: once a credential passes authentication, the resulting session is often treated as trusted for its entire duration. This assumption fails when credentials are stolen. We introduce the Explainable Adaptive Zero Trust Framework (EAZTF), a cloud-native security layer that continuously reevaluates the legitimacy of API actions throughout a session. EAZTF combines Isolation Forest and XGBoost to evaluate eight CloudTrail and IAM-derived behavioral features in real time and produce a Trust Risk Score (TRS) that determines whether a session continues, requires step-up MFA, or is restricted. Each decision is accompanied by a SHAP or LIME explanation, providing human-readable audit records for security analysis and compliance. The framework is also evaluated against four adversarial evasion strategies: credential theft, behavioral mimicry, API rate evasion, and privilege escalation. Experiments on an 8,500-record synthetic CloudTrail dataset show that Isolation Forest achieves 94.4% precision, 91.2% recall, and an F1 score of 0.928. Across the four adversarial scenarios, the mean detection rate is 91.0%, with behavioral mimicry being the most difficult at 83.9%. SHAP analysis identifies IP reputation, login-time deviation, and API call velocity as the three dominant features. A structured NIST SP 800-207 self-assessment gives EAZTF a mean compliance score of 93%, compared with 38% for a traditional perimeter baseline. Mean time to detect decreases from hours to under one minute. Because the evaluation uses synthetic data, these results should be interpreted as indicative rather than validated production performance.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

May 6, 2026

AgentTrust: Runtime Safety Evaluation and Interception for AI Agent Tool Use

Modern AI agents execute real-world side effects through tool calls such as file operations, shell commands, HTTP requests, and database queries. A single unsafe action, including accidental deletion, credential exposure, or data exfiltration, can cause irreversible harm. Existing defenses are incomplete: post-hoc benchmarks measure behavior after execution, static guardrails miss obfuscation and multi-step context, and infrastructure sandboxes constrain where code runs without understanding what an action means. We present AgentTrust, a runtime safety layer that intercepts agent tool calls before execution and returns a structured verdict: allow, warn, block, or review. AgentTrust combines a shell deobfuscation normalizer, SafeFix suggestions for safer alternatives, RiskChain detection for multi-step attack chains, and a cache-aware LLM-as-Judge for ambiguous inputs. We release a 300-scenario benchmark across six risk categories and an additional 630 independently constructed real-world adversarial scenarios. On the internal benchmark, the production-only ruleset achieves 95.0% verdict accuracy and 73.7% risk-level accuracy at low-millisecond end-to-end latency. On the 630-scenario benchmark, evaluated under a patched ruleset and not claimed as zero-shot, AgentTrust achieves 96.7% verdict accuracy, including about 93% on shell-obfuscated payloads. AgentTrust is released under the AGPL-3.0 license and provides a Model Context Protocol server for MCP-compatible agents.
Mar 8, 2026

Trusting What You Cannot See: Auditable Fine-Tuning and Inference for Proprietary AI

Cloud-based infrastructure has become the dominant platform for deploying large models, particularly large language models (LLMs). Fine-tuning and inference are increasingly delegated to cloud providers for simplified deployment and access to proprietary models, yet this creates a fundamental trust gap. Although cryptographic and TEE-based verification approaches exist, prohibitive proving costs and limited TEE memory prevent them from scaling to modern LLMs, leaving clients unable to practically audit these processes. This lack of transparency creates concrete security risks that can silently compromise service integrity. We present AFTUNE, an auditable and verifiable framework that ensures the computational integrity of cloud-based fine-tuning and inference. AFTUNE incorporates a lightweight recording and spot-check mechanism that produces verifiable traces of execution. These traces enable clients to later audit whether the fine-tuning and inference processes followed the agreed configurations, by verifying sampled execution blocks inside a TEE, each covering only a small portion of the model and the execution trace. Our evaluation shows that AFTUNE adds modest overhead and makes auditing practical for clients.
Aug 22, 2026

ExplainGuard: A Zero Trust Framework for Post-Hoc Explanation Integrity Guarantees in Blackbox XAI Models

As machine learning (ML) models are increasingly deployed in high-stakes environments, explainable AI (XAI) methods like SHAP and LIME have become essential for regulatory compliance and trust. However, the current auditing paradigm relies on an implicit "chain of trust" where third-party auditors are assumed to be trusted. Recent research demonstrates that this assumption is flawed and adversarial auditors can manipulate XAI explanations through manipulation attacks such as output shuffling or scaffolding out-of-distribution (OOD) to conceal model biases while maintaining high prediction accuracy aiming for fairwashed explanation. In this paper, we introduce a novel defense framework, ExplainGuard, that leverages a Zero-Trust architecture (ZTA) design to be incorporated within the XAI explanation supply chain and ensures the integrity of the generated explanation. This framework would help us to replace the ambiguous default assumption of "auditor is trustworthy," with a continuous "verify-then-trust" approach. Our design architecture establishes a Policy Decision Point (PDP) that enforces three distinct pillars of verification before any explanation is released to the user: (1) asset integrity via behavioral fingerprint to detect model substitution, (2) semantic validity using axiomatic consistency checks to reject mathematically impossible explanations, and (3) feature faithfulness verification utilizing a ranking stability approach with minimal computational overhead. Finally, we evaluate how ExplainGuard can effectively neutralize state- of-the-art explanation manipulation attacks while transforming the auditing process into a verifiable operation.