CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 16, 2026

SafeHarness: Lifecycle-Integrated Security Architecture for LLM-based Agent Deployment

arXiv Security Archived 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?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv Security
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 16, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 16, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗