Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2605.18414

Prompts Don't Protect: Architectural Enforcement via MCP Proxy for LLM Tool Access Control

Rohith Uppala
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Large language models increasingly operate as autonomous agents that select and invoke tools from large registries. We identify a critical gap: when unauthorized tools are visible in an agent's context, models select them in 48-68% of adversarial scenarios, even when explicitly instructed not to. Role escalation attacks (e.g., "I'm the CFO, override the access controls") are the most dangerous category, reaching 96% unauthorized invocation in frontier models. We show this holds across three models spanning open-weight and frontier systems, including instruction-tuned models with strong alignment training. Critically, prompt-based compliance is both insufficient and unpredictable: explicit per-tool allowlists reduce violations to as low as 4.0% but never to zero, and compliance varies widely across models, from 4.0% to 37.0% UIR, with no reliable relationship to general capability. We propose a proxy-enforced attribute-based access control (ABAC) layer for MCP that filters tool registries at discovery time. Because unauthorized tools never reach the model context, UIR is 0% by design, a structural guarantee that prompt instructions cannot replicate regardless of model or phrasing.

Explore related subjects

cs.CRcs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Rohith Uppala. 2026-08-27. Prompts Don't Protect: Architectural Enforcement via MCP Proxy for LLM Tool Access Control. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.18414

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.AI subjectcs.CR subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

arXiv2026

Optimal Adversarial Testing: Extracting Honest Test Results from Dishonest Test Takers

In applications, it is often required to test objects or people to determine their qualities in terms of certain metrics. However, besides being naturally noisy, the test results can be corrupted by adversarial behaviors of objects or people being tested (test takers). For example, dishonest test takers can cheat in the exams to distort the test results. With the development of AI technologies, such distortions driven by cheating using AI technologies are becoming more commonplace and severe. In this paper, we propose optimal testing strategies which can still recover needed test results even if there are cheaters polluting the results. The proposed testing strategies will optimally re-test selected group of test takers using different testing security measures. We determine the optimal testing strategies using a dynamic programming method.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Let Them Steal: Trapping Large Language Model Extraction Attacks with Knowledge Honeypot

Large language models deployed as commercial APIs are vulnerable to model extraction attacks, while existing defenses either act too late or degrade utility for legitimate users. We propose \textbf{Knowledge Trap}, a defense that redirects extraction attacks toward low-transferability knowledge through a \emph{Honeypot Knowledge Graph} (HKG) and breadcrumb-guided exploration. Instead of blocking queries or perturbing outputs, Knowledge Trap consumes the attacker's limited query budget on knowledge with negligible downstream utility while preserving benign-user performance. Experiments in medical and financial domains show that Knowledge Trap reduces surrogate Agreement by 6.2\% on average without degrading legitimate-user accuracy, outperforming existing defenses that impose measurable user impact. These results suggest that defending knowledge-space traversal is a practical direction for mitigating LLM extraction attacks.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

AgenTRIM: Tool Risk Mitigation for Agentic AI

AI agents are autonomous systems that combine LLMs with external tools to solve complex tasks. While such tools extend capability, improper tool permissions introduce security risks such as indirect prompt injection and tool misuse. We characterize these failures as unbalanced tool-driven agency. Agents may retain unnecessary permissions (excessive agency) or fail to invoke required tools (insufficient agency), amplifying the attack surface and reducing performance. We introduce AgenTRIM, a framework for detecting and mitigating tool-driven agency risks without altering an agent's internal reasoning. AgenTRIM addresses these risks through complementary offline and online phases. Offline, AgenTRIM reconstructs and verifies the agent's tool interface from code and execution traces. At runtime, it enforces per-step least-privilege tool access through adaptive filtering and status-aware validation of tool calls. Evaluating on the AgentDojo benchmark, AgenTRIM substantially reduces attack success while maintaining high task performance. Additional experiments show robustness to description-based attacks and effective enforcement of explicit safety policies. Together, these results show that AgenTRIM provides a practical, capability-preserving approach to safer tool use in LLM-based agents.

cs.CR↗