Multi-agent LLM pipelines orchestrate multiple specialized language model agents into structured workflows where intermediate outputs are passed across agents to solve complex tasks. This design introduces a security gap absent in single-agent settings: once an agent accepts adversarial content, it is propagated as trusted input throughout the pipeline. We argue that this vulnerability stems from the absence of boundary verification, a security primitive that enforces explicit validation of data as it crosses inter-agent boundaries, including content, identity, execution intent, and state integrity. Without such verification, modern pipelines embed implicit trust assumptions that are not adversarially robust, giving rise to structurally distinct attack surfaces (e.g., content injection, agent impersonation, plan deviation, and memory poisoning). Leveraging annotated production traces from the GAIA and SWE-Bench benchmark, we show that these vulnerabilities arise in benign deployments and largely evade existing evaluation frameworks. We further operationalize these failure modes within a controlled multi-agent setting and evaluate them across GPT-5-mini, Claude Sonnet 4.5, and Kimi K2.5 under identical pipeline configurations. The results reveal that attack success aligns with pipeline structure rather than model capability, indicating that adversarial vulnerability is fundamentally an architectural property and motivating a shift toward pipeline-level defenses.
Large language models can generate C code from natural-language descriptions, but resulting programs often contain security vulnerabilities and compilation errors, posing risks for embedded and resource-constrained systems. This work investigates how feedback and retrieval improve reliability of LLM-generated C code. We present an analysis-and-repair workflow that combines compilation diagnostics, CodeQL static analysis, and KLEE symbolic execution with retrieval of prior repair patterns for iterative refinement. Evaluated on 5,000 C programming tasks exercising embedded relevant vulnerabilities, baseline models show substantial reliability gaps, with compilation failure rates up to 46% and security defect rates up to 49%. Our approach improves both metrics. For CodeLlama 7B, security defect rates decrease from 49% to 19% and total CodeQL errors drop from 15,088 to 2,463 (83.7%). For DeepSeek Coder 1.3B, compilation failures are reduced from 42% to 22% and security defects from 35% to 15%. These results show that integrating lightweight analysis tools can improve the safety of LLM-generated code for embedded development.
Yiteng Peng, Dongwei Xiao, Zhibo Liu +2cs.CR cs.LG
Fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) allows computations to be performed directly on encrypted data without decryption, offering strong privacy guarantees for sensitive data analysis. This capability is important for privacy-sensitive applications like secure cloud computing, finance, and healthcare. The complexity of FHE schemes, however, has hindered their practical adoption. To make FHE accessible to a broader range of developers, a new generation of specialized frameworks has emerged to translate high-level FHE programs into complex FHE operations, introducing a new programming paradigm. However, the inherent complexity of FHE frameworks makes them prone to incorrect implementation logic. Unlike mere crashes, logic bugs in these frameworks can silently corrupt encrypted computation, potentially leading to severe financial losses and security vulnerabilities in FHE-enhanced applications. In this work, we introduce HERTA, the first automated testing tool tailored for FHE frameworks. HERTA leverages metamorphic testing to uncover deep-seated implementation bugs and vulnerabilities across the multi-layered FHE software stack. To that end, we design a set of novel metamorphic relations (MRs) derived specifically from FHE semantics. These MRs stress the most challenging aspects of the pipeline, enabling automated correctness testing without the need for a manual ground truth. Our evaluation of HERTA on 3 leading industry frameworks discovered 21 previously unknown bugs, several of which have already been confirmed and fixed by developers. Furthermore, our hazard analysis reveals the critical security impact these bugs pose to the integrity and availability of FHE-based services.
Data agents integrate LLM-driven reasoning with relational data access, executable analytical tools, and multi-step workflow orchestration, making them increasingly central to enterprise analytics. This integration introduces new security vulnerabilities across data resources, database execution, and agent reasoning, recombining concerns from database security and general-purpose LLM-agent security into failure modes that neither line of work captures on its own. To address this gap, we present a systematic security study of data agents. Our contributions are threefold. First, we develop a layered vulnerability framework that identifies eight data agent-specific risks across interpretation, execution, and policy layers. Second, we introduce an attack taxonomy organized by adversary goal, tactic, and technique, covering three goals, seven tactics, and fourteen techniques, and pair it with an LLM-driven payload generation pipeline grounded in real database schemas. Third, we evaluate these attacks on six systems, including four open-source data agents and two production cloud analytics services. Our experiments reveal substantial security vulnerabilities across current systems and yield four key takeaways.