SoK: When Safe Agents Fail Together: The Security of Multi Agent LLM Systems

LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) solve complex tasks through inter-agent collaboration, but their communication-driven nature also allows security risks to spread across agents and trigger system-wide failures. Existing MAS defenses mainly follow a reactive paradigm after execution by detecting and isolating harmful agents, which may cause irreversible damage and degrade collaborative utility. To address this, we propose a proactive defense framework for MAS security, namely a Simulation-aware Interception Guard (SAIGuard). SAIGuard performs communication-state simulation over the MAS interaction graph, estimates the impact of incoming messages on local agent states and the global MAS state, and detects risky messages via reconstruction deviations from benign communication patterns. Instead of isolating agents, SAIGuard sanitizes or regenerates suspicious messages before it propagation into system. Experiments across diverse topologies and attack scenarios show that SAIGuard reduces attack success rates while maintaining MAS utility, outperforming reactive defenses.

Large language model (LLM)-powered multi-agent systems (MAS) enable agents to communicate and share information, achieving strong performance on complex tasks. However, this communication also creates an attack surface where malicious agents can propagate misinformation and manipulate group decisions, undermining MAS safety. Existing embedding-based defenses aim to detect and prune suspicious agents, but their effectiveness depends on a clear separation between the text embeddings of malicious and benign messages. Attackers can circumvent such defenses by crafting messages whose embeddings lie close to benign ones. We analyze this failure mode theoretically and validate it empirically with three attacks, Slow Drift, Benign Wrapper, and Chaos Seeding. Our analysis further reveals a fundamental limitation of embedding-based defenses: because they rely solely on the text embeddings, they ignore token-level confidence signals such as logits, which can remain informative when embeddings are not distinguishable under attack. We propose using confidence scores to prune or down-weight messages during MAS communication. Experiments show improved robustness across models, datasets, and communication topologies. Moreover, we find that the effectiveness of confidence signals decays over communication rounds, highlighting the importance of early intervention. This insights can inform and inspire future work on MAS attacks and defenses.

Multi-agent systems (MAS), composed of networks of two or more autonomous AI agents, have become increasingly popular in production deployments, yet introduce security risks that do not arise in single-agent settings. Even if individual agents exhibit robust security, architectural decisions governing their coordination can create attack surfaces that have not been systematically characterized. In this work, we present an empirical study of how MAS design decisions shape the tradeoff between task performance and attack resistance. Across three agentic environments (browser, desktop, and code) and 13 architectural configurations, we use stagewise evaluations that distinguish planning refusal, execution-stage interception, partial harmful execution, and successful attack completion to study three key design choices: (i) agent roles, which determine how authority and responsibility are allocated; (ii) communication topology, which shapes how and when agents interact; and (iii) memory, which determines the context and state visibility accessible to each agent. We find that multi-agent architectures are more vulnerable than standalone agents in the majority of configurations, with attack success rates varying by up to 3.8x at comparable or higher benign accuracy, and that no single design is universally safer. These results motivate the development of further evaluations that move beyond the security properties of a single agent.