SafeHarness: Lifecycle-Integrated Security Architecture for LLM-based Agent Deployment
arXiv SecurityArchived Apr 16, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2604.13630v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The performance of large language model (LLM) agents depends critically on the execution harness, the system layer that orchestrates tool use, context management, and state persistence. Yet this same architectural centrality makes the harness a high-value attack surface: a single compromise at the harness level can cascade through the entire execution pipeline. We observe that existing security approaches suffer from structural mismatch, leaving th
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
[Submitted on 15 Apr 2026]
SafeHarness: Lifecycle-Integrated Security Architecture for LLM-based Agent Deployment
Xixun Lin, Yang Liu, Yancheng Chen, Yongxuan Wu, Yucheng Ning, Yilong Liu, Nan Sun, Shun Zhang, Bin Chong, Chuan Zhou, Yanan Cao, Li Guo
The performance of large language model (LLM) agents depends critically on the execution harness, the system layer that orchestrates tool use, context management, and state persistence. Yet this same architectural centrality makes the harness a high-value attack surface: a single compromise at the harness level can cascade through the entire execution pipeline. We observe that existing security approaches suffer from structural mismatch, leaving them blind to harness-internal state and unable to coordinate across the different phases of agent operation. In this paper, we introduce \safeharness{}, a security architecture in which four proposed defense layers are woven directly into the agent lifecycle to address above significant limitations: adversarial context filtering at input processing, tiered causal verification at decision making, privilege-separated tool control at action execution, and safe rollback with adaptive degradation at state update. The proposed cross-layer mechanisms tie these layers together, escalating verification rigor, triggering rollbacks, and tightening tool privileges whenever sustained anomalies are detected. We evaluate \safeharness{} on benchmark datasets across diverse harness configurations, comparing against four security baselines under five attack scenarios spanning six threat categories. Compared to the unprotected baseline, \safeharness{} achieves an average reduction of approximately 38\% in UBR and 42\% in ASR, substantially lowering both the unsafe behavior rate and the attack success rate while preserving core task utility.
Comments: 26 pages, 6 figures
Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2604.13630 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2604.13630v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.13630
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Yang Liu Aron [view email]
[v1] Wed, 15 Apr 2026 08:59:00 UTC (4,021 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?)