CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 06, 2026

Poison Once, Exploit Forever: Environment-Injected Memory Poisoning Attacks on Web Agents

arXiv Security Archived Apr 06, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.02623v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Memory makes LLM-based web agents personalized, powerful, yet exploitable. By storing past interactions to personalize future tasks, agents inadvertently create a persistent attack surface that spans websites and sessions. While existing security research on memory assumes attackers can directly inject into memory storage or exploit shared memory across users, we present a more realistic threat model: contamination through environmental observation

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Cryptography and Security [Submitted on 3 Apr 2026] Poison Once, Exploit Forever: Environment-Injected Memory Poisoning Attacks on Web Agents Wei Zou, Mingwen Dong, Miguel Romero Calvo, Wei Zou, Shuaichen Chang, Jiang Guo, Dongkyu Lee, Xing Niu, Xiaofei Ma, Yanjun Qi, Jiarong Jiang Memory makes LLM-based web agents personalized, powerful, yet exploitable. By storing past interactions to personalize future tasks, agents inadvertently create a persistent attack surface that spans websites and sessions. While existing security research on memory assumes attackers can directly inject into memory storage or exploit shared memory across users, we present a more realistic threat model: contamination through environmental observation alone. We introduce Environment-injected Trajectory-based Agent Memory Poisoning (eTAMP), the first attack to achieve cross-session, cross-site compromise without requiring direct memory access. A single contaminated observation (e.g., viewing a manipulated product page) silently poisons an agent's memory and activates during future tasks on different websites, bypassing permission-based defenses. Our experiments on (Visual)WebArena reveal two key findings. First, eTAMP achieves substantial attack success rates: up to 32.5% on GPT-5-mini, 23.4% on GPT-5.2, and 19.5% on GPT-OSS-120B. Second, we discover Frustration Exploitation: agents under environmental stress become dramatically more susceptible, with ASR increasing up to 8 times when agents struggle with dropped clicks or garbled text. Notably, more capable models are not more secure. GPT-5.2 shows substantial vulnerability despite superior task performance. With the rise of AI browsers like OpenClaw, ChatGPT Atlas, and Perplexity Comet, our findings underscore the urgent need for defenses against environment-injected memory poisoning. Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2604.02623 [cs.CR]   (or arXiv:2604.02623v1 [cs.CR] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.02623 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Mingwen Dong [view email] [v1] Fri, 3 Apr 2026 01:25:12 UTC (475 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.CR < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv Security
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 06, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 06, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗