CredLeakBench: Evaluating Credential Leakage and Recovery in LLM Agents

Rafid Ahmed; Joseph Fioresi; Mubarak Shah; Yuzhang Shang

cs.CROct 6, 2026

CredLeakBench: Evaluating Credential Leakage and Recovery in LLM Agents

Authors: Rafid Ahmed, Joseph Fioresi, Mubarak Shah, Yuzhang Shang

Abstract

Language model agents are increasingly deployed to automate everyday digital chores from managing emails and social media to handling banking and bills allowing users to step away from supervision. However, this capability also exposes sensitive information to phishing. Safe execution requires distinguishing malicious requests from genuine ones without simply refusing to act. Despite its practical importance, this problem remains underexplored and it is unclear whether current agents or existing defenses can achieve it. To study this problem, we first propose CredLeak-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate how effectively and securely agents automate human workflows when confronted with phishing and identity verification. The benchmark covers both user-directed authentication and autonomous inbox monitoring, where agents are not explicitly instructed to log in. It systematically varies deceptive cues and pairs phishing scenarios with legitimate counterparts, enabling joint evaluation of information leakage and utility on genuine tasks. Within a sandboxed environment, leakage is measured through actual submissions of information rather than agents' self-reported behavior. Our evaluation reveals that all tested models are vulnerable to leakage. Agents also disclose sensitive information during autonomous inbox monitoring, demonstrating that phishing can induce disclosure without a user request to authenticate. Furthermore, most evaluated mitigations that reduce leakage also impair performance on genuine tasks, exposing a security utility trade off in existing defenses. These findings show why reducing leakage alone is insufficient: effective defenses must prevent unauthorized disclosure while preserving legitimate task completion. CredLeak-Bench provides a controlled framework for measuring both objectives and evaluating progress toward secure, useful agents.

Explore similar work

May 29, 2026cs.CR

PrivacyPeek: Auditing What LLM-Based Agents Acquire, Not Just What They Say

LLM-based agents are rapidly advancing, autonomously invoking external tools to complete multi-step tasks for users. However, agents often acquire more sensitive information than the task requires. Existing privacy benchmarks audit what the agent's response or outgoing actions disclose, but overlook the acquisition stage where data first enters the agent's context. The over-acquired information is then one careless action or one attack away from an outright leak. To assess its prevalence, we introduce \emph{PrivacyPeek}, a benchmark for evaluating acquisition-stage privacy leakage of LLM-based agents, with

1{,}182

cases across

7

acquisition behaviours and

16

application domains. Specifically, \emph{Acquisition Inspection} examines the agent's tool-call trajectory, both the tools it invokes and the data it receives, to detect when it acquires sensitive information beyond the task scope. \emph{Probe Elicitation} then issues a follow-up probe and measures how readily an attacker could elicit sensitive information the agent acquired but did not disclose. Our experiments on 10 LLM-based agents across 4 model families show that the unnecessary acquisition of sensitive information is widespread. In addition, we observe a correlation between the task-completion capability and acquisition-stage leakage. Prompt-level defences reduce only a small fraction of acquisition-stage leakage, leaving the majority unmitigated. These results make auditing acquisition-stage privacy both urgent and necessary. Our dataset and code are available at https://github.com/Xuan269/PrivacyPeek-Resource.

Mingxuan Zhang, Jiahui Han, Dadi Guo +5

Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory · Southeast University

Data Leakage Privacy Auditing AI Agent Auditing LLM Agent Security Privacy Leakage in Language Models AI Agent Security Benchmarks

Ask PDF

Oct 6, 2026cs.LG

DecepEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Deception in LLM Agents

As large language model (LLM) agents become increasingly autonomous, they may pursue task performance through deception, raising concerns about their reliable deployment. Existing evaluations show that LLM agents can deceive, but often examine isolated scenarios or narrowly defined conditions, limiting systematic understanding of when deception becomes more likely. To address this gap, we introduce DecepEval, a benchmark comprising 1,532 instances across 3 task families and 28 professional scenarios. Drawing on classical fraud theories, we propose the LLM Deception Diamond framework, which characterizes four external conditions that may induce deception: pressure, incentive, opportunity, and conflict. DecepEval pairs neutral and induced versions of each instance to measure condition-dependent changes in deception rates, while explicit task facts and observable agent behavior help distinguish deception from capability-related errors. Evaluations of nine frontier LLMs show that inducements increase deception across models and task families, even among models with low baseline deception rates. DecepEval makes these vulnerabilities measurable, providing a shared benchmark for progress toward trustworthy artificial intelligence.

Yiming Xu, Hongyue Yu, Beihua Yang +8

Xi’an Jiaotong University · University of Virginia · Griffith University +2

Deception in Language Models LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Safety Benchmarks LLM Agent Safety

Ask PDF

Jun 15, 2026cs.CR

An Evaluation of Data Leakage Risks in Tool-Using LLM Agents in Realistic Scenarios

AI agents are increasingly being adopted in enterprise and personal settings with access to emails, databases, documents, and other tools where they can read, update, and disseminate sensitive information. Much of prior research on data leakage risks in agents has focused on adversarial data exfiltration through prompt injections and jailbreaks. However, sensitive information may also be exposed during non-adversarial use, creating leakage risks even when users issue benign requests. We report a joint evaluation by the Singapore AI Safety Institute and the Korea AI Safety Institute examining agent data leakage in 12 realistic, non-adversarial tasks spanning customer support, DevOps, web automation, and enterprise and personal productivity. The evaluation covers five risk types: lack of data awareness, audience awareness, policy compliance, data minimization, and access-boundary awareness. Both institutes tested a common set of scenarios mirroring real-world deployments using independent testing environments and task-specific LLM-judge rubrics. Across the three tested agents, none achieved fully correct and fully safe execution across all scenarios. Successful task completion often coincided with data-handling failures such as accessing unnecessary information or disclosing information to inappropriate recipients, indicating that capability and data-handling safety should be evaluated separately. Qualitative review also revealed claim-action mismatches, simulation-aware behavior, user-simulator role reversal, and interpretation gaps in automated judging. Overall, the results indicate that operational data leakage is a first-order agent-safety concern distinct from adversarial exfiltration and provide a methodology for future evaluations of agent data-handling safety.

Hankyul Baek, Jaewon Noh, Sang Seo +5

Korea AI Safety Institute · Singapore AI Safety Institute

Data Leakage LLM Agent Evaluation AI Agent Safety Tool-Using Agents

Ask PDF