NiyamAI is presented, an intent bound runtime guardrail architecture providing cryptographically verifiable execution integrity for autonomous agents and subjects its own enforcement mechanism to 18 adversarial vectors across six classes, disclosing two implementation vulnerabilities identified and remediated during development.
Abstract
Autonomous LLM agents with tool execution capabilities introduce severe security risks through prompt injection, goal hijacking, and unauthorized action invocation. Existing guardrails rely on unverified, host local software filters system prompts, semantic classifiers, policy engines that share the execution environment of the untrusted agent, offering no guarantee to an external observer that a safety policy was correctly evaluated. A compromised host produces no evidence of its own failure. This paper presents NiyamAI, an intent bound runtime guardrail architecture providing cryptographically verifiable execution integrity for autonomous agents. At session initialization, permitted tools and operational constraints are sealed into an immutable Intent Contract under a SHA256 commitment. Every tool invocation is intercepted by a deterministic authority gate and classified by a dedicated neural Judge (11->8->2 feedforward network). For each authorized action, NiyamAI generates a succinct zkSNARK proof certifying correct policy evaluation under the committed contract; execution proceeds only after that proof verifies. Across 2,000 AgentSafetyBench scenarios under 5fold stratified crossvalidation with out of fold scoring, NiyamAI achieves 88.8% F1 at a 1.0% false positive rate (bootstrap 95% CI [85.5%, 92.1%]), against 66.8% for Llama Prompt Guard 2, 46.2% for GPTOSSSafeguard, and 40.4% for NeMo Guardrails; McNemar's exact test confirms each margin at p<0.0001. Proof generation adds 1.7 s per approved action, verification 51 ms, with an 18.6 KB proof verifiable by any third party without access to model parameters. We further subject NiyamAI's own enforcement mechanism to 18 adversarial vectors across six classes, disclosing two implementation vulnerabilities identified and remediated during development.
This paper evaluated Niyam-AI on 2,000 real-world agent scenarios from Agent-SafetyBench and compared it against three existing safety approaches: NeMo Guardrails, Meta's Llama Prompt Guard 2, and OpenAI's GPT-OSS-Safeguard.
Autonomous AI agents increasingly execute actions, invoke tools, and operate on protected resources with limited human oversight. Existing authentication and authorization mechanisms establish identity and delegate authority, but do not inherently provide cryptographic evidence that a concrete request issued by a specific agent satisfies the applicable policy in a specific execution context. This paper hypothesizes that agent authorization can be formalized as a cryptographically verifiable relation, denoted $R_{CVA}$, that jointly binds an agent principal, a concrete authorization request, an execution context, and the satisfaction of an applicable policy, while selectively preserving the confidentiality of private authorization attributes. We introduce a preliminary formal abstraction for Cryptographically Verifiable Agent Authorization (CVA), define a compact set of candidate security properties including authorization soundness, principal binding, request binding, policy binding, and replay resistance, and provide an executable zero-knowledge proof of concept that instantiates selected elements of the model over a Groth16 zk-SNARK construction. We further identify and formalize the structural separation among identity binding, authorization-request binding, and runtime execution binding as a central open problem in the design of secure agentic systems (a distinction {not explicitly addressed by} current agentic security frameworks) and present a falsifiable research agenda for its resolution.
M. Llambí-Morillas, D. Fernández-Fernández· 0 citations
LLM agents are stateless and rely on external memory to carry context between steps. Because agents treat that memory as trustworthy, an adversary who can write to it can steer their behavior. The FARMA attack does this with no malicious command: it inserts fabricated entries into the agent's reasoning memory claiming a required safety step is already done, so the agent skips it. SENTINEL, the defense proposed with FARMA, scores entries against a fixed list of suspicious wordings; its authors note that an attacker who knows the list can reword the forgery and evade it, and leave this open. We show the gap is worse than stated. An automated attacker that simply asks a language model to reword the forgery evades SENTINEL on its first try, reducing its protection to zero on every model tested. We also find a capability paradox: the attack succeeds far more often on stronger models (98-100% on GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini) than on Llama-3.1-8B (44%), because more capable agents follow reworded claims more faithfully, so the threat grows with capability. We propose Proof-of-Execution Memory (PoEM), which does not inspect memory at all. PoEM keeps a separate, tamper-evident, HMAC-chained ledger of the safety steps that actually executed, writable only by the trusted action layer, and allows a skip only if the ledger confirms real execution. An attacker can change what memory says but cannot forge a ledger entry for a step that never ran, so rewording no longer helps. Across three models and three scenarios, PoEM drives attack success to 0% while leaving legitimate operation intact (0% false positives in eight of nine cells, 1.7% in the ninth, within sampling noise), whereas SENTINEL wrongly blocks 33-50% of legitimate operations. PoEM also withstands attacks aimed at itself, adds microseconds of overhead, and works unchanged in a real LangChain agent. PoEM protects exactly the decisions it gates.
Agentic artificial intelligence expands the enterprise security boundary because autonomous agents can plan
tasks, retain memory, invoke tools, call APIs, and initiate business actions. Authentication at session start is therefore
insufficient when later actions may be influenced by untrusted content, poisoned memory, compromised tools, or excessive
delegated privilege. This paper proposes the Zero Trust Agentic AI Security Framework (ZT-AASF), a vendor-neutral
architecture that applies continuous verification to consequential agent actions. The framework separates six control
planes: identity and delegation, context and data trust, policy and risk decision, tool and action enforcement, runtime
observability, and containment and recovery. A contextual authorization model evaluates delegated scope, source
provenance, data sensitivity, tool risk, behavioral deviation, and action impact before execution. A design-level evaluation
against ten OWASP agentic risk classes produces 27 of 30 control-coverage points for ZT-AASF versus 5 of 30 for a
conventional integration baseline. These values represent architectural coverage, not measured attack-prevention rates.
The results indicate that moving enforcement from the session boundary to the action boundary can reduce implicit trust,
constrain privilege propagation, and improve auditability while preserving useful autonomy.
Sachin Suryawanshi· International Journal of Inn...· 0 citations
This work proposes zero-knowledge auditable control and zero-trust verifiable agentic intent architecture ($Z^2$-ACT), which integrates the aforementioned four primitives across the non-real-time and near-real-time RICs.
S. A. Khowaja, K. Dev, George C. Alexandropoulos· 0 citations
Multi-agent AI platforms move quickly from staging to production, but the way agents establish trust remains rudimentary: an agent either transmits raw data to a peer or accepts that peer's natural-language self-report that a value complies with policy. The first over-shares; the second is unverifiable and is exactly the channel prompt injection attacks. Prevailing responses emphasise identity, visibility, and post-hoc detection, and recent proposals for cryptographically enforced agent policy have been evaluated in simulation rather than execution. We take provable data minimisation between agents from proposal to running system. In our Zero-Knowledge Proof Gateway, agents exchange proofs of governance-defined predicates over private data rather than the data itself, so exposure is prevented by design rather than detected afterwards; because no interoperability protocol can carry such a proof, we propose a slot and implement it on both MCP and Agent2Agent from one endpoint. A 32-bit threshold predicate proves in 6.2 ms and verifies in 1.0 ms with a 608-byte Bulletproofs proof on one commodity vCPU; eleven adversarial experiments and nineteen protocol checks pass; and the system is deployed to Kubernetes with empirically verified network isolation. Our case study proves a retail client order is within its limit without revealing the amount, instantiating the GDPR data-minimisation principle as an enforced technical measure of the kind EU law now names explicitly. We then address the limitation no comparable work resolves: a predicate proof binds a statement to a committed value, never to the system of record. We give a construction fusing an enclave attestation with the proof in both directions, so verifying one artifact certifies jointly that the predicate holds and that the value was read by a specific measured binary, and test it against a mock authority.
Ashok Subbabhatta Gopalakrishna· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
