Privacy Protection for LLM Agents

As LLMs become increasingly woven into everyday workflows, user queries sent to cloud hosted LLMs routinely mix task-essential content with task non-essential sensitive disclosures, yet type based PII redaction is context agnostic and may raise two issues: over disclosing untyped sensitive context and over removing answer bearing spans. We recast privacy preserving query rewriting under Contextual Integrity: a span should be forwarded only if it is necessary for the task. We introduce DelegateCI-Bench, the first task based Contextual Integrity benchmark for privacy-conscious delegation, comprising 3,167 samples that combine high quality synthetic data spanning 11 tasks and 20 task types, WildChat based real user queries, and a medical challenge set with dense sensitive information. Building on this benchmark, we propose a CI-guided reinforcement learning framework that converts essential and non-essential sensitive spans into verifiable optimization signals, and train a query rewriter to preserve task critical information while suppressing unnecessary sensitive disclosure. Experiments show that our learned rewriter achieves the best privacy-utility tradeoff, achieving up to +10.1 average utility over on-device baselines.

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 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, 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. 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.

LLM safety evaluations predominantly test models in isolation, yet deployed AI agents increasingly operate within persistent social environments alongside other agents. We introduce a Moltbook-style simulation platform where thousands of LLM agents interact across communities over a simulated month, and use it to evaluate privacy as a downstream safety concern under varying degrees of social pressure. We find that shifting from single turn to multi turn social evaluation amplifies privacy violations (CIMemories 19.95% to Ours 45.30% across OpenAI models), that leakage is socially contagious, with agents 8 times more likely to disclose sensitive information after observing a peer do so, and that explicit privacy instructions reduce but do not eliminate this effect, leaving leakage rates above 37.8% even with safeguards. Our findings suggest that static chat based safety benchmarks systematically underestimate risks in agentic deployment, and that social context alone is sufficient to elicit sensitive disclosures that single turn evaluations would never surface.

Large language model (LLM) agents face a structural tension: cloud agents provide strong reasoning but expose user data, while on-device agents preserve privacy at the cost of overall capability. Existing device-cloud designs treat this boundary as a compute split rather than a trust boundary suited to agentic workloads, and existing sanitizers force a choice between policy flexibility and the structural fidelity tool calls require. In this work, we develop PAAC, a privacy-aware agentic framework that aligns planner--executor decomposition with the device-cloud boundary so that role specialization itself becomes the privacy mechanism. The cloud agent reasons over typed placeholder tokens that preserve each sensitive value's reasoning role while discarding its content, while the on-device agent identifies sensitive spans and distills each step's execution outcome into compact key findings. Sanitization confines the on-device LLM to proposing which spans to mask, while a deterministic registry performs all substitution and reversal, keeping actions directly executable on device. On three agentic benchmarks under strict privacy settings, PAAC dominates the Pareto frontier of privacy and accuracy, improving average accuracy by 15-36% and reducing average leakage by 2-6$\times$ over state-of-the-art device-cloud baselines, with the largest margins on privacy targets outside fixed entity taxonomies. We find consistent improvements on 17 additional benchmarks spanning 10 domains, including math, science, and finance.

LLM agents increasingly draft messages on behalf of users, yet users routinely overshare sensitive information and disagree on what counts as private. Existing systems support only suppression (omitting sensitive information) and generalization (replacing information with an abstraction), and are typically evaluated on single isolated messages, leaving both the strategy space and evaluation setting incomplete. We formalize privacy-preserving LLM communication as an Information Sufficiency (IS) task, introduce free-text pseudonymization as a third strategy that replaces sensitive attributes with functionally equivalent alternatives, and propose a conversational evaluation protocol that assesses strategies under realistic multi-turn follow-up pressure. Across 792 scenarios spanning three power-relation types (institutional, peer, intimate) and three sensitivity categories (discrimination risk, social cost, boundary), we evaluate seven frontier LLMs on privacy at two granularities, covertness, and utility. Pseudonymization yields the strongest privacy\textendash utility tradeoff overall, and single-message evaluation systematically underestimates leakage, with generalization losing up to 16.3 percentage points of privacy under follow-up.

In LLM agent pipelines, prompt privacy risk propagates beyond a single model call: raw user content enters retrieval queries, memory writes, tool arguments, OCR-derived text, and logs, and every downstream copy inherits what the first write contained. Existing de-identification pipelines protect document boundaries but not this cross-stage surface. We present BodhiPromptShield, a policy-aware mediation layer that detects sensitive spans before they propagate, replaces each with a typed placeholder, a semantic abstraction, or a secure symbolic token under a configured policy, and defers restoration to authorized execution boundaries. We evaluate it under one protocol against Presidio, Casper-style sanitization, an LLM sanitizer, and transformer and learned detectors, on 300 AI4Privacy documents, 493 PrivacyLens trajectories, 200 PrivacyLens tasks scored by that benchmark's own judge, and AgentDojo tasks under injection. Three findings result. Identifier propagation is controllable: residual exposure falls to 7.4% on AI4Privacy and 1.8% on PrivacyLens, and exact identifiers in an agent's final action fall from 13.7% to 2.1-3.1%. Restoration timing governs what every stage upstream of the authorized boundary sees: deferring it leaves 1.6% of protected values readable in the released context against 51.0%, and 2.7% against 4.8% in what the agent emits, for 0.11 helpfulness points. Measuring factual disclosure is harder: a word-overlap metric and an LLM judge both report that mediation leaves facts intact, and both disagree with blind human annotation (kappa = 0.25 and 0.09). The human labels reverse that: inferability falls from 100% to 24-53% under mediation, so semantic-leakage measures need human validation before they are trusted. These are systems results on English text with open-weight models, not formal guarantees.

With the rise of personalized, persistent LLM agent frameworks such as OpenClaw, human-centered agentic social networks in which teams of collaborative AI agents serve individual users in a social network across multiple domains are becoming a reality. This setting creates novel privacy challenges: agents must coordinate across domain boundaries, mediate between humans, and interact with other users' agents, all while protecting sensitive personal information. While prior work has evaluated multi-agent coordination and privacy preservation, the dynamics and privacy risks of human-centered agentic social networks remain unexplored. To this end, we introduce AgentSocialBench, the first benchmark to systematically evaluate privacy risk in this setting, comprising scenarios across seven categories spanning dyadic and multi-party interactions, grounded in realistic user profiles with hierarchical sensitivity labels and directed social graphs. Our experiments reveal that privacy in agentic social networks is fundamentally harder than in single-agent settings: (1) cross-domain and cross-user coordination creates persistent leakage pressure even when agents are explicitly instructed to protect information, (2) privacy instructions that teach agents how to abstract sensitive information paradoxically cause them to discuss it more (we call it abstraction paradox). These findings underscore that current LLM agents lack robust mechanisms for privacy preservation in human-centered agentic social networks, and that new approaches beyond prompt engineering are needed to make agent-mediated social coordination safe for real-world deployment.

The large-scale adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) forces a trade-off between operational cost (OpEx) and data privacy. Current routing frameworks reduce costs but ignore prompt sensitivity, exposing users and institutions to leakage risks towards third-party cloud providers. We formalise the "Inseparability Paradigm": advanced context management intrinsically coincides with privacy management. We propose a local "Privacy Guard" -- a holistic contextual observer powered by an on-premise Small Language Model (SLM) -- that performs abstractive summarisation and Automatic Prompt Optimisation (APO) to decompose prompts into focused sub-tasks, re-routing high-risk queries to Zero-Trust or NDA-covered models. This dual mechanism simultaneously eliminates sensitive inference vectors (Zero Leakage) and reduces cloud token payloads (OpEx Reduction). A LIFO-based context compacting mechanism further bounds working memory, limiting the emergent leakage surface. We validate the framework through a 2x2 benchmark (Lazy vs. Expert users; Personal vs. Institutional secrets) on a 1,000-sample dataset, achieving a 45% blended OpEx reduction, 100% redaction success on personal secrets, and -- via LLM-as-a-Judge evaluation -- an 85% preference rate for APO-compressed responses over raw baselines. Our results demonstrate that Token Parsimony and Zero Leakage are mathematically dual projections of the same contextual compression operator.

Supporting users in protecting sensitive information when using conversational agents (CAs) is crucial, as users may undervalue privacy protection due to outdated, partial, or inaccurate knowledge about privacy in CAs. Although privacy knowledge can be developed through standalone resources, it may not readily translate into practice and may remain detached from real-time contexts of use. In this study, we investigate in-context, experiential learning by examining how interactions with privacy tools during chatbot use enhance users' privacy learning. We also explore interface design features that facilitate engagement with these tools and learning about privacy by simulating ChatGPT's interface which we integrated with a just-in-time privacy notice panel. The panel intercepts messages containing sensitive information, warns users about potential sensitivity, offers protective actions, and provides FAQs about privacy in CAs. Participants used versions of the chatbot with and without the privacy panel across two task sessions designed to approximate realistic chatbot use. We qualitatively analyzed participants' pre- and post-test survey responses and think-aloud transcripts and describe findings related to (a) participants' perceptions of privacy before and after the task sessions and (b) interface design features that supported or hindered user-led protection of sensitive information. Finally, we discuss future directions for designing user-facing privacy tools in CAs that promote privacy learning and user engagement in protecting privacy in CAs.

Responsible use of AI demands that we protect sensitive information without undermining the usefulness of data, an imperative that has become acute in the age of large language models. We address this challenge with an on-premise, LLM-driven substitution pipeline that anonymizes text by replacing personally identifiable information (PII) with realistic, type-consistent surrogates. Executed entirely within organizational boundaries using local LLMs, the approach prevents data egress while preserving fluency and task-relevant semantics. We conduct a systematic, multi-metric, cross-technique evaluation on the Action-Based Conversation Dataset, benchmarking against industry standards (Microsoft Presidio and Google DLP) and a state-of-the-art approach (ZSTS, in redaction-only and redaction-plus-substitution variants). Our protocol jointly measures privacy, semantic utility, and trainability under privacy via a lifecycle-ready criterion obtained by fine-tuning a compact encoder (BERT+LoRA) on sanitized text. In addition, we assess agentic Q&A performance by inserting an on-premise anonymization layer before the answering LLM and evaluating the quality of its responses. This intermediate, type-preserving substitution stage ensures that no sensitive content is exposed to third-party APIs, enabling responsible deployment of Q&A agents without compromising confidentiality. Our method attains state-of-the-art privacy, minimal topical drift, strong factual utility, and low trainability loss, outperforming rule-based approaches and named-entity recognition (NER) baselines and ZSTS variants on the combined privacy--utility--trainability frontier. These results show that local LLM substitution yields anonymized corpora that are both responsible to use and operationally valuable: safe for agentic pipelines and suitable for downstream fine-tuning with limited degradation.

LLM agents increasingly act on users' personal information, yet existing privacy defenses remain limited in both design and adaptability. Most prior approaches rely on static or passive defenses, such as prompting and guarding. These paradigms are insufficient for supporting contextual, proactive privacy decisions in multi-step agent execution. We propose Contextualized Defense Instructing (CDI), a new privacy defense paradigm in which an instructor model generates step-specific, context-aware privacy guidance during execution, proactively shaping actions rather than merely constraining or vetoing them. Crucially, CDI is paired with an experience-driven optimization framework that trains the instructor via reinforcement learning (RL), where we convert failure trajectories with privacy violations into learning environments. We formalize baseline defenses and CDI as distinct intervention points in a canonical agent loop, and compare their privacy-helpfulness trade-offs within a unified simulation framework. Results show that our CDI consistently achieves a better balance between privacy preservation (94.2%) and helpfulness (80.6%) than baselines, with superior robustness to adversarial conditions and generalization.

Agentic Large Language Models (LLMs) are models able to reason, plan, and execute tools over unstructured data. These abilities enable transformative applications in domains spanning personal assistants, financial, and legal domains, etc. While these systems can substantially improve productivity and service quality, effective agency typically requires access to sensitive personal or organizational information. However, this access introduces critical inference-time privacy risks, specifically regarding contextually appropriate information disclosure. While recent studies highlight the inability of agentic LLMs to consistently adhere to privacy norms, existing defenses often rely on auxiliary LLM-based monitors. However, these defenses are expensive and offer limited protection against attacks that are robust to semantic censorship. To contrast this background, this paper proposes a notion of privacy filters based on activation probing. We show that these filters are both computationally efficient and effective for both single-turn and multi-turn conversational settings. Furthermore, this work provides the first systematic investigation into probing model internals across a conversation trajectory, moving beyond static, single-prompt analysis to capture the evolving state of privacy-sensitive interactions, illustrating their applicability across contexts, attack styles, multiple base models, and challenging settings such as mosaic attacks, while providing nuanced insights into the nature of the discovered concepts and modular construction of probes.