Agent Memory Poisoning
Momentum
4 papers in the last four weeks, against 2 the four weeks before. 0.0% of all new papers.
Latest papers 54
We investigate when belief-based memory actually improves large language model (LLM) agents. Our vehicle is Nous, a long-term memory architecture that represents each entity-attribute pair as a categorical probability distribution updated through closed-form Bayesian inference, with information-theoretic surprise driving belief revision and entropy-based forgetting. A controlled ablation on the LoCoMo benchmark shows that Bayesian belief updating alone provides little benefit over naive last-write-wins because existing conversational memory benchmarks rarely contain contradictory or differently reliable evidence. We then introduce reliability-conditioned updating, estimating per-observation reliability from epistemic language, and show on a controlled contradiction benchmark that belief updating substantially outperforms last-write-wins and raw-memory retrieval when observations differ in trustworthiness. Because content-derived reliability is itself vulnerable to manipulation, we further propose provenance-capped belief updating, where trust is bounded by source provenance rather than textual confidence. Under controlled memory-poisoning experiments, this approach resists volumetric poisoning attacks while revealing the utility costs and implementation requirements of provenance-aware memory. Finally, we quantify a 27.5-point discrepancy between strict token-F1 and LLM-as-judge evaluation on identical outputs, highlighting important reproducibility concerns for long-term memory benchmarks. Our results suggest that probabilistic belief-based memory is most beneficial in environments requiring reasoning over conflicting and differently trustworthy evidence, rather than conventional conversational recall alone.
FragFuse: Bypassing Access Control of Large Language Model Agents via Memory-Based Query Fragmentation and Fusion
Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on long-term memory to support complex task execution, user personalization, and domain adaptation. Meanwhile, emerging access-control mechanisms for LLM agents are being explored to block policy-violating requests and prevent misuse. We reveal a novel attack surface arising from agent memory operations: prohibited content that would trigger access control can be fragmented across interactions, stored in long-term memory in benign-appearing form, and later reconstructed through memory retrieval without appearing explicitly in the final user query. We propose FragFuse, the first attack that enables unprivileged users to bypass agent access control by exploiting this temporal channel introduced by long-term memory. FragFuse operates in three stages: (1) identifying rejection-responsive fragments via black-box adaptive querying with fragment masking; (2) injecting these fragments into memory using marker carrier queries; and (3) retrieving and fusing the stored fragments through a follow-up attack query. Although FragFuse can be instantiated manually for individual agents, we further develop a surrogate-based optimization scheme that tunes fusion instructions and marker designs, enabling automated attack generation without violating the attacker's threat-model assumptions. We evaluate FragFuse across four representative agent settings and task domains, covering three state-of-the-art agent access-control mechanisms. FragFuse achieves an average bypass success rate of 86.3% and an average end-to-end harmful task success rate of 41.1% across all settings, with only 4.4% average task-success degradation compared with configurations without access control. We also show that alternative defenses, including state-of-the-art prompt-injection detectors and perplexity detectors, do not effectively address this attack.
The Containment Gap: How Deployed Agentic AI Frameworks Fail Public-Facing Safety Requirements
Agentic large language model systems that autonomously invoke tools, maintain persistent memory, and execute multi-step plans are increasingly deployed in public-facing domains, including government services, healthcare triage, and financial advising. We ask whether the frameworks used to build these systems provide architectural-level structural safety guarantees. Applying six containment principles derived from a compositional model of agentic architectures, we audit three dominant frameworks (LangChain, AutoGPT, and OpenAI Agents SDK) and find no native compliance in any of them. Memory integrity, a defense against one of the most prevalent vulnerability classes, is not observed in any of the three evaluated frameworks. We validate these findings empirically: in a simulated government benefits agent built on LangChain, a single memory-poisoning write induces persistent targeted corruption across all tested seeds and backends, increasing the wrongful denial rate for targeted applicants to 88.9%. Under a complex five-factor policy, the same attack preserves aggregate accuracy while increasing targeted wrongful denials by 3.5x, rendering the corruption difficult to detect through standard monitoring. We then introduce two lightweight containment mechanisms: a memory integrity validator and a policy gate, which eliminate both attack vectors with sub-millisecond overhead (<0.2ms per call). We conclude that the current agentic framework ecosystem may not yet meet secure-by-default expectations for public-facing deployments and outline priority architectural interventions to enable trustworthy deployment in high-stakes, socially impactful applications.
SMSR: Certified Defence Against Runtime Memory Poisoning in Persistent LLM Agent Systems
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) agents increasingly run with persistent memory that accumulates across user sessions. This creates a new attack surface: an adversary interacting only through normal channels can inject crafted memories that, once retrieved, steer the agent's responses for future users, without touching model weights or code. We call this Multi-Session Memory Poisoning (MSMP) and show that no existing defence certifies against it; static-corpus defences (RobustRAG, ReliabilityRAG) assume a fixed knowledge base, and heuristic filters are bypassed by fluent enterprise-style text. We present Signed Memory with Smoothed Retrieval (SMSR), the first defence with a certified robustness bound for this setting. Component 1 adds HMAC-SHA256 provenance at write time, blocking unsigned injection. Component 2 applies randomised memory ablation with verdict-based majority voting at query time, bounding the influence of authenticated adversaries. We prove that no provenance-free retrieval-time filter can certify against adaptive injection, derive a hypergeometric certificate for Component 2, and formalise the Consistent Minority Effect, whereby a consistent adversarial answer wins string-based voting as a numerical minority while verdict-based voting removes it. Across 15 enterprise scenarios (3,150 repeated trials), Component 1 cuts attack success from 93-100% to 0% for all unsigned variants. For an authenticated adversary with a single injection, Component 2 holds success to 8.0% (95% CI [5.8, 10.9], n=450), below the certified worst case. In an end-to-end query-only attack where the agent itself writes the poison rather than it being pre-seeded, SMSR reduces success from 65.3% to 5.3% (n=150, non-overlapping CIs) on a live agent stack. Clean-query utility is 90% (Component 1) and 85% (combined).
MemVenom: Triggered Poisoning of Multimodal Memories in Web Agents
External memory has become a core component of modern web agents, enabling long-horizon reasoning through the retrieval of past experiences. However, this paradigm introduces a critical vulnerability: malicious content injected into memory can be persistently recalled and repeatedly influence agent behavior. In this work, we identify and systematically study multimodal memory poisoning, an overlooked yet practical attack surface in web-agent systems. We propose MemVenom, a unified black-box attack framework that poisons graph-structured external memory with coordinated text-image evidence. Our method consists of a two-stage design: (1) a trigger-conditioned retrieval attack that ensures high-probability recall of malicious memory, and (2) a post-retrieval attack induction that leverages adversarial perturbations and stealthy OCR injection to override the original user objective. Unlike prior attacks that operate on prompts or text-only memory, our approach enables persistent, reusable, and goal-agnostic attacks without modifying model parameters or re-optimizing malicious tasks. Experiments across multiple web-agent frameworks and vision-language models demonstrate that MemVenom achieves strong end-to-end attack success with minimal impact on benign performance, reaching up to 99.15% on GPT-5-family web agents, while transferring effectively across architectures and model scales.
What If Prompt Injection Never Left? Exploring Cross-Session Stored Prompt Injection in Agentic Systems
Modern agentic systems transform LLMs from session-bounded assistants into stateful systems that persist and evolve shared world state across sessions through memories, filesystems, tools, and other long-lived contextual artifacts. This shift fundamentally expands the attack surface of prompt injection. However, prior works on prompt injection have largely focused on model-level threats within a single session, overlooking how cross-session persistent system state fundamentally changes the system-level risk of agentic systems. Inspired by stored cross-site scripting in web systems, we introduce cross-session stored prompt injection, where a successful injection can persist within agentic system state and silently influence future executions long after the original attacker interaction has ended. To systematically study this threat, we formalize stored prompt injection and develop a taxonomy of how adversarial content persists and affects agentic systems across sessions. We further develop a benchmark and sandbox toolkit to evaluate the risks of stored prompt injection, enabling quantitative analysis of attack success across different models, attack goals, and persistence channels. Our findings highlight that persistence transforms prompt injection from an ephemeral model-level threat into a long-lived system-level vulnerability embedded within agent execution state. We hope this work draws broader attention to this emerging threat and motivates the community to systematically study and mitigate system risks arising from persistence in agentic systems.
From Untrusted Input to Trusted Memory: A Systematic Study of Memory Poisoning Attacks in LLM Agents
Memory is a core component of AI agents, enabling them to accumulate knowledge across interactions and improve performance. However, persistent memory introduces the risk of memory poisoning, where a single adversarial memory write can exert long-term influence over agent behavior. We present a systematic study of memory poisoning in LLM-based agents. We identify four memory write channels and nine structural vulnerabilities in model capabilities, system prompt design, and agent system architecture that make these channels exploitable. Based on these vulnerabilities, we develop a taxonomy of six classes of memory poisoning attacks. Furthermore, we design MPBench -- a benchmark for evaluating memory poisoning attacks, and show that agents designed to write and retrieve memory more aggressively are more exploitable. We also show that existing prompt injection defenses fail to cover memory poisoning attacks. Our findings provide a foundation for understanding and mitigating memory poisoning attacks against AI agents.
MemPoison: Bypassing Selective Memory Mechanisms to Plant Backdoors in LLM Agents
Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly leverage long-term memory to support persistent and autonomous task execution. However, this capability also introduces a new attack surface: memory poisoning, where adversaries can inject malicious information to influence future behavior. Existing memory poisoning attacks often assume that injected content can be stored directly in memory, overlooking the selective extraction and rewriting stages in modern memory pipelines. This makes prior methods ineffective under realistic settings. In this paper, we propose MemPoison, a novel memory poisoning attack that bypasses selective memory mechanisms in LLM agents, where an attacker can inject triggerable backdoors into the agent's long-term memory through dialogue interactions, thereby misleading its subsequent responses. MemPoison introduces three key components: (i) a semantic relational bridge that binds the trigger and payload into a coherent statement to ensure their co-extraction into memory; (ii) entity masquerading that optimizes triggers to mimic named entities, resisting rewriting; and (iii) joint embedding optimization that shapes trigger-injected texts into a tight cluster in the embedding space while maintaining isolation from benign embeddings for stealth. Evaluations across different agent domains and memory mechanisms show MemPoison achieves attack success rates up to 0.95, outperforming existing baselines. Mechanistic analysis reveals the exploitation of embedding-space anisotropy and attention redistribution, highlighting core vulnerabilities in selective memory systems. We evaluate multiple defense strategies and demonstrate their fundamental limitations in mitigating the attack. We release our code to facilitate further research.
Plant, Persist, Trigger: Sleeper Attack on Large Language Model Agents
Large Language Model (LLM) agents remain vulnerable to safety threats from the external environment, where attackers inject adversarial content into external observations such as tool-returned data, webpages, or MCP context, causing harmful agentic behaviors such as unsafe actions or incorrect outputs. Existing studies typically focus on single-interaction attacks, where the agent observes adversarial content and immediately exhibits harmful behavior within one user request. However, we show that adversarial content can also persist across interactions served by the same agent, making such threats harder to detect and mitigate. Specifically, adversarial content may persist in the agent state, remain dormant across interactions, and later be activated by a benign user query. We formalize this type of safety threat as Sleeper Attack. To evaluate it, we construct a benchmark with 1,896 instances covering six real-world harmful outcomes, three attack strategies, and three agent state targets: session context, memory, and reusable skills. Experiments on seven strong open-source and closed-source LLMs show that state-of-the-art LLM agents remain vulnerable to Sleeper Attack, even when they achieve low attack success rates under a single-interaction baseline. Our code and data are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/skdvnfu23ihr9wdscnksf1asdffsaef.
MemMorph: Tool Hijacking in LLM Agents via Memory Poisoning
LLM-driven agents are capable of selecting external tools to complete users' tasks. However, attackers could compromise such process, steering agents toward inappropriate/wrong tools and enabling malicious actions. Most existing attacks primarily manipulate the tool metadata, which is easily detectable by auditing and may lose effectiveness as modern agents increasingly adopt memory modules to refine tool selection policies through accumulated experience. This paper proposes MemMorph, the first attack that bias tool selection by poisoning the agent's long-term memory. Rather than explicitly dictating the tool invocation decision, MemMorph injects a small number of crafted records that are disguised as technical facts, incident reports, and operational policies. These poisoned records reshape the agent's contextual perception and decision-making process, leading it to autonomously infer and select the tool preferred by the attacker. Experiments across 3 benchmarks, 10 agent backbones, and 3 memory-module implementations show that MemMorph achieves up to 85.9% attack success rate with only three injected records, outperforming the strongest baseline by up to 25% while retaining potency under 3 representative defenses. Our findings expose long-term memory as a critical and under-explored attack surface in tool-augmented agents, urging the development of memory-level integrity safeguards.
MemAudit: Post-hoc Auditing of Poisoned Agent Memory via Causal Attribution and Structural Anomaly Detection
Large language model agents increasingly rely on persistent memory to store past interactions, retrieve relevant demonstrations, and improve long-horizon task execution. However, this memory mechanism also creates a practical security vulnerability: an adversarial user may inject malicious records into the agent's memory through ordinary interaction, and these records can later be retrieved to steer the agent's reasoning and actions. Existing defenses primarily focus on online intervention, such as prompt filtering or output blocking, but they do not address the post-hoc question of which stored memories are responsible after harmful behavior has already been observed. We propose \textbf{MemAudit}, a post-hoc causal memory auditing framework for memory-augmented LLM agents. The framework combines two complementary signals: (1) a counterfactual memory influence score that measures each memory's causal contribution to harmful outputs, and (2) a memory consistency graph that identifies structurally anomalous memories within the broader memory store. We evaluate MemAudit against MINJA, a query-only memory injection attack in which malicious records are generated and stored through normal agent interactions rather than direct memory-bank modification. Across both QA and reasoning-agent settings, MemAudit substantially reduces attack success rates under realistic post-hoc auditing scenarios. The results show that QA attack success is reduced from to , while RAP attack success drops from to .
OEP: Poisoning Self-Evolving LLM Agents via Locally Correct but Non-Transferable Experiences
Memory-augmented large language model (LLM) agents use iterative reflection and self-evolution to solve complex tasks, but these mechanisms introduce security risks. Existing agentic memory attacks require privileged access or explicit malicious content, making them detectable by advanced safety filters. This leaves a subtler attack surface underexplored: whether adversaries can induce agent to generate experiences that appear locally correct and semantically plausible yet induce harmful generalization during reflection. We find that reflective agents are vulnerable to such clean experiences, especially when paired with severe but plausible hypothetical consequences. Based on this observation, we introduce Obsessive Experience Poisoning (OEP), a low-privilege black-box attack requiring no direct control over the system prompt or memory database. OEP constructs adversarial clean edge-cases that combine locally correct solutions, non-transferable methods, and severe consequences, biasing reflection toward risk-averse rule formation. During memory consolidation, agents may over-trust self-generated reflections and distill localized experiences into high-priority but over-generalized rules, causing downstream failures. Evaluations across three domains show that OEP achieves ASR above 50% with GPT-4o agents, and outperforms existing attacks under LLM auditing defense.
Hidden in Memory: Sleeper Memory Poisoning in LLM Agents
Large language models are increasingly augmented with persistent memory, allowing assistants to store user-specific information across sessions for personalization and continuity. This statefulness introduces a new security risk: adversarial content can corrupt what an assistant remembers and thereby influence future interactions. We propose and study sleeper memory poisoning, a delayed attack in which an adversary manipulates external context, such as a document, webpage, or repository, to cause the assistant to store a fabricated memory about the user. Unlike conventional prompt injection, the attack can remain dormant and re-emerge across multiple later conversations. We evaluate the full attack pipeline: whether poisoned memories are written, later retrieved, and ultimately used to steer the following conversations. Across stateful LLM assistants, poisoned memories were added up to 99.8% on GPT-5.5 and 95% on Kimi-K2.6. Crucially, among successful retrievals, poisoned memories cause attacker-intended agentic actions in 60-89% of evaluations across models. These results show that persistent memory can act as a long-term attack surface across multiple future conversations.
MemLineage: Lineage-Guided Enforcement for LLM Agent Memory
We introduce MemLineage, a defense for LLM agent memory that attaches both cryptographic provenance and LLM-mediated derivation lineage to every entry. Recent and concurrent work shows that untrusted content can be written into persistent agent state and re-enter later sessions as an instruction; the remaining systems question is how to preserve useful memory recall while preventing such state from justifying sensitive actions. MemLineage treats this as a chain-of-custody problem rather than a filtering problem. It is a six-module design around an RFC-6962 Merkle log over per-principal Ed25519-signed entries: a weighted derivation DAG records which retrieved entries influenced each new memory, and a max-of-strong-edges propagation rule makes Untrusted-Path Persistence hold for any chain whose attribution edges remain above threshold. The sensitive-action gate then refuses dispatches whose active justification descends from an external ancestor, while still allowing benign recall. We evaluate three defense cells against three memory-poisoning workloads on a deterministic mechanism-isolation harness; MemLineage is the only configuration in that harness that drives all three columns to zero ASR, while sub-millisecond per-operation overhead keeps it well below the noise floor of any LLM call. A Codex-backed AgentDojo bridge further separates strong-model behavior from defense-layer behavior: under an intentionally vulnerable tool-output profile, no-defense and signature-only baselines fail on all six banking pairs, while all MemLineage rows reduce strict AgentDojo ASR to zero. The core deterministic artifacts are byte-equal CI-verified; hosted-model AgentDojo and live-model sweeps are recorded as auditable logs rather than byte-pinned artifacts.
The Misattribution Gap: When Memory Poisoning Looks Like Model Failure in Agentic AI Systems
Multi-agent AI pipelines typically assume that agent misconduct originates from model misalignment. We identify a structural failure in this assumption, the \emph{Misattribution Gap}, where memory-layer attacks produce behaviors indistinguishable from model failure, causing defenders to apply the wrong remediation. We formalize \emph{Semantic Norm Drift} (SND) as a third path to agent misconduct, distinct from emergent misalignment and collusion. In SND, a policy-formatted document enters a shared vector store through normal uploads and later reappears as trusted system context after provenance is lost through a Trust Laundering Chain. Across 64 documented failures, attribution systems consistently blamed the model. Four safety classifiers, including one trained on memory poisoning, produced zero detections across 510 checkpoints. In 59 of 65 valid cases, agents explicitly cited the injected document as normative authority before complying. The attack requires no trigger, model access, or repeated interaction, achieves full effect within five sessions, and persists indefinitely. We introduce Counterfactual Composition Testing, which identifies the causal entry with 87.5% accuracy and zero false positives, while a forensics baseline fails across all 25 scenarios. We further prove the Retrieval-Coverage Dilemma, showing that stronger evasion inherently weakens the attack, limiting adaptive bypass strategies. Finally, we propose Memory-Persistent Information-Flow Control, which blocks 97% of attacks at the cross-session boundary where prior defenses fail. We release the SND Corpus, the first adversarial memory benchmark with temporal persistence and multi-agent composition across financial and Health Care domains.
EquiMem: Calibrating Shared Memory in Multi-Agent Debate via Game-Theoretic Equilibrium
Multi-agent debate (MAD) systems increasingly rely on shared memory to support long-horizon reasoning, but this convenience opens a critical vulnerability: a single corrupted entry can contaminate the downstream memory-augmented reasoning, and debate alone fails to filter such errors. Existing safeguards filter entries via heuristics or LLM-based validation, yet they rely on AI judgments that share the same failure modes and overlook the cross-agent dynamics of MAD. We address this gap by formulating memory updating in MAD as a zero-trust memory game, in which no agent is assumed reliable and the game's equilibrium motivates a principled objective for calibrating memory influence. Guided by this objective, we propose EquiMem, an inference-time calibration mechanism that evaluates each update against the shared memory state and the memory already being used by other agents, using their existing retrieval queries and traversal paths as evidence of calibration. EquiMem instantiates this calibration for both embedding- and graph-based memory, and across diverse benchmarks, MAD frameworks, and memory architectures, it consistently outperforms existing safeguards, remains robust under adversarial agents, and incurs negligible inference overhead.
ShadowMerge: A Novel Poisoning Attack on Graph-Based Agent Memory via Relation-Channel Conflicts
Graph-based agent memory is increasingly used in LLM agents to support structured long-term recall and multi-hop reasoning, but it also creates a new poisoning surface: an attacker can inject a crafted relation into graph memory so that it is later retrieved and influences agent behavior. Existing agent-memory poisoning attacks mainly target flat textual records and are ineffective in graph-based memory because malicious relations often fail to be extracted, merged into the target anchor neighborhood, or retrieved for the victim query. We present SHADOWMERGE, a poisoning attack against graph-based agent memory that exploits relation-channel conflicts. Its key insight is that a poisoned relation can share the same query-activated anchor and canonicalized relation channel as benign evidence while carrying a conflicting value. To realize this, we design AIR, a pipeline that converts the conflict into an ordinary interaction that can be extracted, merged, and retrieved by the graph-memory system. We evaluate SHADOWMERGE on Mem0 and three public real-world datasets: PubMedQA, WebShop, and ToolEmu. SHADOWMERGE achieves 93.8% average attack success rate, improving the best baseline by 50.3 absolute points, while having negligible impact on unrelated benign tasks. Mechanism studies show that SHADOWMERGE overcomes the three key limitations of existing agent-memory poisoning attacks, and defense analysis shows that representative input-side defenses are insufficient to mitigate it. We have responsibly disclosed our findings to affected graph-memory vendors and open sourced SHADOWMERGE.
Defense effectiveness across architectural layers: a mechanistic evaluation of persistent memory attacks on stateful LLM agents
Persistent memory in LLM agents creates an attack surface that production safety classifiers do not observe: the payload enters via RAG retrieval and persists across sessions via tool-mediated memory. We evaluate six defenses across four architectural layers against delayed-trigger attacks on nine open-source models (5,040 runs, N=40 per condition). Five of six defenses fail: input-level filters never see the payload (it enters via RAG, not user input); retrieval-level classifiers observe it but cannot distinguish compliance-framed injection from legitimate policy; instruction-level hardening is overridden by the stored rule's compliance framing. Only tool-gating at the memory layer (Memory Sandbox) reduces ASR to 0% for eight of nine models, with zero utility cost. A reasoning model inverts this defense via goal-directed RAG fallback, a mechanism that replicates cross-family on Bedrock. A reasoning-mode ablation reveals a double dissociation: no single sandbox implementation is safe across both reasoning and non-reasoning model classes. We resolve this with a content-layer proof-of-concept (RATG), validated on non-reasoning models. A loaded-corpus frontier evaluation (21 models, 3 providers, N=40) overturns an initial empty-corpus screen showing 0/210 exfiltrations: that was a threat-model artifact, not model safety. Under realistic conditions, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview exfiltrates at 95% ASR, GPT-5.1 regresses to 22.5% relative to GPT-5 (5%), and Anthropic blocks at the injection layer (0-17.5% storage, 0% ASR). Nearly all OpenAI and Gemini models store the rule at 100% regardless of execution resistance, creating supply-chain risk in shared-memory deployments. Defense effectiveness is determined by architectural layer and reasoning capability, not classifier quality.
When Routine Chats Turn Toxic: Unintended Long-Term State Poisoning in Personalized Agents
Personalized LLM agents maintain persistent cross-session state to support long-horizon collaboration. Yet, this persistence introduces a subtle but critical security vulnerability: routine user-agent interactions can gradually reshape an agent's long-term state, inadvertently weakening future confirmation boundaries, expanding tool-use defaults, and escalating autonomous behavior over time. We formalize this risk as \textbf{unintended long-term state poisoning}. To systematically study it, we introduce the \textbf{Unintended Long-Term State Poisoning Bench (ULSPB)}, a bilingual benchmark comprising settings spanning five assistance categories, seven interaction patterns, 24-turn routine interactions, and matched single-injection counterparts. Furthermore, we define the \emph{Harm Score} (HS), a state-centric metric that quantifies \emph{authorization drift}, \emph{tool-use escalation}, and \emph{unchecked autonomy}. Experiments on OpenClaw with four backbone LLMs demonstrate that, while single-injection is generally effective, routine conversations alone can substantially poison long-term state, primarily corrupting memory-centric artifacts. Evaluations seeded with real-world user interactions confirm that this risk is not a mere artifact of synthetic prompts. To mitigate this threat, we propose \textbf{StateGuard}, a lightweight, post-execution defense that audits state diffs at the writeback boundary and selectively rolls back dangerous edits. Across all evaluated models, StateGuard reduces HS to near zero and lowers false-negative rates, with acceptable high false-positive rates under a safety-first writeback defense and minimal overhead.
MEMSAD: Gradient-Coupled Anomaly Detection for Memory Poisoning in Retrieval-Augmented Agents
Persistent external memory enables LLM agents to maintain context across sessions, yet its security properties remain formally uncharacterized. We formalize memory poisoning attacks on retrieval-augmented agents as a Stackelberg game with a unified evaluation framework spanning three attack classes with escalating access assumptions. Correcting an evaluation protocol inconsistency in the triggered-query specification of Chen et al. (2024), we show faithful evaluation increases measured attack success by (ASR-R: ). Our primary contribution is MEMSAD (Semantic Anomaly Detection), a calibration-based defense grounded in a gradient coupling theorem: under encoder regularity, the anomaly score gradient and the retrieval objective gradient are provably identical, so any continuous perturbation that reduces detection risk necessarily degrades retrieval rank. This coupling yields a certified detection radius guaranteeing correct classification regardless of adversary strategy. We prove minimax optimality via Le Cam's method, showing any threshold detector requires calibration samples and MEMSAD achieves this up to factors. We further derive online regret bounds for rolling calibration at rate , and formally characterize a discrete synonym-invariance loophole that marks the boundary of what continuous-space defenses can guarantee. Experiments on a attack-defense matrix with bootstrap confidence intervals, Bonferroni-corrected hypothesis tests, and Clopper-Pearson validation () confirm: composite defenses achieve TPR , FPR across all attacks, while synonym substitution evades detection at ASR-R , exposing a gap existing embedding-based defenses cannot close.
Trojan Hippo Bench: A Dynamic Benchmark for Persistent Memory Attacks and Defenses in LLM Agents
Memory systems enable otherwise stateless LLM agents to persist user information across sessions, but also introduce a new attack surface. The Trojan Hippo attack is a class of persistent memory attacks that operates under a more realistic threat model than prior memory poisoning work. The attacker plants a dormant payload into an agent's long-term memory via a single untrusted tool call (e.g., a crafted email), which activates only when the user later discusses sensitive topics such as finance, health, or identity, and exfiltrates high-value personal data to the attacker. While anecdotal demonstrations of such attacks have appeared against deployed systems, no prior work systematically evaluates them across heterogeneous memory architectures and defenses. We introduce Trojan Hippo Bench, a dynamic evaluation framework for persistent memory attacks and memory-layer defenses, comprising two components, (1) an OpenEvolve-based adaptive red-teaming benchmark that stress-tests defenses and memory backends against continuously refined attacks, and (2) a capability-aware security-utility analysis for persistent memory systems, enabling principled reasoning about defense deployment across different usage profiles. Instantiated on an email assistant across four memory backends (explicit tool memory, agentic memory, RAG, and sliding-window context), the undefended Trojan Hippo attack achieves up to 85-100% attack success rate (ASR) against current frontier models from OpenAI and Google, with planted memories successfully activating even after 100 benign sessions. We evaluate four memory-system defenses inspired by basic security principles; they reduce attack success to as low as 0-5%, but at utility costs that vary widely with the task mix. Effective real-world deployment thus remains an open challenge that Trojan Hippo Bench is built to study; we release it to support reuse and extension.
Visual Inception: Compromising Long-term Planning in Agentic Recommenders via Multimodal Memory Poisoning
The evolution from static ranking models to Agentic Recommender Systems (Agentic RecSys) empowers AI agents to maintain long-term user profiles and autonomously plan service tasks. While this paradigm shift enhances personalization, it introduces a vulnerability: reliance on Long-term Memory (LTM). In this paper, we uncover a threat termed "Visual Inception." Unlike traditional adversarial attacks that seek immediate misclassification, Visual Inception injects triggers into user-uploaded images (e.g., lifestyle photos) that act as "sleeper agents" within the system's memory. When retrieved during future planning, these poisoned memories hijack the agent's reasoning chain, steering it toward adversary-defined goals (e.g., promoting high-margin products) without prompt injection. To mitigate this, we propose CognitiveGuard, a dual-process defense framework inspired by human cognition. It consists of a System 1 Perceptual Sanitizer (diffusion-based purification) to cleanse sensory inputs and a System 2 Reasoning Verifier (counterfactual consistency checks) to detect anomalies in memory-driven planning. Extensive experiments on a mock e-commerce agent environment demonstrate that Visual Inception achieves about 85% Goal-Hit Rate (GHR), while CognitiveGuard reduces this risk to around 10% with configurable latency trade-offs (about 1.5s in lite mode to about 6.5s for full sequential verification), without quality degradation under our setup.
MemEvoBench: Benchmarking Safety Risks from Memory Misevolution in LLM Agents
Equipping Large Language Models (LLMs) with persistent memory enhances interaction continuity and personalization but introduces new safety risks. Specifically, contaminated or biased memory accumulation can trigger abnormal agent behaviors. Existing evaluation methods have not yet established a standardized framework for measuring memory misevolution. This phenomenon refers to the gradual behavioral drift resulting from repeated exposure to misleading information. To address this gap, we introduce MemEvoBench, the first benchmark evaluating long-horizon memory safety in LLM agents against adversarial memory injection, noisy tool outputs, and biased feedback. The framework consists of QA-style tasks across 7 domains and 36 risk types, complemented by workflow-style tasks adapted from 20 Agent-SafetyBench environments with noisy tool returns. Both settings employ mixed benign and misleading memory pools within multi-round interactions to simulate memory evolution. Experiments on representative models reveal substantial safety degradation under biased memory updates. Our analysis suggests that memory evolution is a significant contributor to these failures. Furthermore, static prompt-based defenses prove insufficient, underscoring the urgency of securing memory evolution in LLM agents.
Attention is All You Need Until You Need Retention
Pretrained Transformers keep what they learned in their weights and lose what they observe once a session ends. The first version of this paper proposed a Retention Layer, a persistent memory that a Transformer block reads with attention and writes during use. Because most of what a deployed model could retain is produced by other agents, this revision treats deciding what to keep as a social learning problem: when to rely on observed behaviour, whom to learn from and how much independent agreement to require. We give a corrected specification of the layer, which reduces exactly to the base Transformer when its memory is empty. We derive the memory's lifecycle from social learning strategies: encoding gated by surprise, observed outcomes and earned credibility; consolidation by a credibility weighted quorum of distinct, recent sources that must also outweigh every rival behaviour; and reconsolidation by the outcomes of reproduction. We prove that raising the quorum lowers the risk of consolidating a coordinated false template exponentially while delaying true templates only linearly, and that relative consolidation protects only while credible honest evidence arrives faster than adversarial evidence. In a simulation with world drift and three memory-poisoning attacks, the lifecycle reached accuracies of 0.989 to 0.996, against 0.62 to 0.63 for the ungated first version design, and kept attack success at or below 0.07 when 30% of the observations about a target were adversarial. As predicted, it amplified attacks once adversarial evidence outpaced honest evidence. Experience with a long running assistant adds two rules: a model's own outputs must not count as support, and a user's testimony should be kept after one mention. We close with an evaluation protocol for language models.