CoDeL: Co-Evolutionary Defense against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM-based Agents

LLM-based agents are increasingly deployed for complex tasks requiring planning, tool use, and interaction with external services. Their reliance on untrusted external content exposes them to indirect prompt injection (IPI), in which adversarial instructions embedded in retrieved data hijack agent behavior. Existing attacks rely on static payloads that cannot adapt to agent-specific defenses; even recent adaptive methods lack structured feedback to guide optimization. We introduce \oursys, a feedback-guided iterative framework that closes the loop between injection, diagnosis, and refinement: a rule-based diagnoser produces structured outcome labels with behavioral descriptions, and an LLM-based optimizer refines payloads conditioned on the full optimization history. A synthesis step generates new disguise seeds from failure patterns, enabling the strategy space to self-evolve. On AgentDojo and InjectAgent, \oursys substantially outperforms static baselines and existing adaptive methods across four victim models. Extension experiments on Claude Code, a production-grade coding agent with layered defenses, show that optimized payloads achieve full success on 5 of 9 targets; even those that resist full exploitation exhibit measurable improvement from iterative refinement. We further present a mechanistic analysis of IPI, identifying an attention-mediated threshold mechanism in mid-to-late layers; three causal interventions validate this finding and point to concrete defense directions.

Language-model agents are vulnerable to indirect prompt injection (IPI) during tool use: adversarial instructions hidden in untrusted tool outputs can covertly redirect legitimate task execution. Existing work often trains and evaluates defenses against fixed attacks that do not adapt to the defender's behavior, so the resulting defenses may struggle against adaptive attacks in real-world settings. We argue that a strong defense against adaptive IPI must adapt during training to a continually evolving attacker. Building on this insight, we propose CoER, a verifier-grounded co-evolution and refinement framework that models interleaved tool calls and adaptive injections within a task as a general-sum Markov game: the defender advances the task through successive tool calls, while the attacker can inject multiple times within the same task and adapt subsequent attacks to the defender's responses and prior execution traces. After initializing the attacker from successful trajectories, bilateral adversarial reinforcement learning (BA-RL) retains historical policies from both roles as opponent populations and mixes current and historical opponents, extending training beyond the latest matchup. Attackers from these populations are then reused to challenge teacher agents, and only demonstrations verified for both safety and task completion are used to fine-tune the co-evolved defender. Across seven domains and three evaluation seeds, CoER reduces adaptive attack success from 41.3% to 0.2% and raises safe task completion from 39.6% to 76.2%; external benchmarks also show improved attack resistance. Further experiments validate the effectiveness of bilateral historical-opponent mixing and population-guided refinement. Attacker analyses show that co-evolution strengthens attack capabilities and that the trained attacker uses execution feedback to adapt subsequent injections.

Indirect prompt injection (IPI) is a major security threat to LLM-powered agents. Thus, a growing body of work has proposed a variety of defensive approaches against IPI which can be grouped into three broad categories: prompt-level, filter-based, and system-level designs. However, commonly used benchmarks for evaluating defense, such as AgentDojo, are \emph{inherently static}, generating a fixed distribution of IPI attacks. Consequently, a defense can score well on them without being robust to adaptive threats. We introduce \textbf{AutoDojo}, a generative benchmark built on AgentDojo and AgentDyn that generates IPI \emph{adaptively} for a given agent and defense. It supports six task suites across the two benchmarks, covering banking, communication, travel, shopping, coding, and everyday-assistant domains. AutoDojo optimizes injections under a strict black-box setting, observing only whether a candidate injection succeeds, and can readily integrate, and often improve on, any existing black-box attack. Across ten defenses and five target models, AutoDojo demonstrates that standard static benchmarks often significantly overestimate defense efficacy. Moreover, we show that most existing defenses either sacrifice considerable utility or are insecure. Finally, we demonstrate that attack success interacts with task specification, with under-specified tasks particularly vulnerable. AutoDojo is available at https://github.com/xhOwenMa/AutoDojo