analiza aiqbench
This paper establishes a critical security framework for the emerging paradigm where LLM agents function as privileged system kernels, identifying an irreducible gap in detecting semantic-based attacks. It argues that current evaluations overstate security by failing to account for the inability to deterministically verify content semantics without prior restriction to enumerated sets. The work provides a necessary research agenda for designing AI-native operating systems that integrate these specific trust-boundary constraints into their core architecture.
When the Agent Becomes the Kernel: A Systematization of Security on the Path to AI-Native Operating Systems
arXiv:2609.23700v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model agents are now privileged principals that take consequential actions: editing code repositories, operating inboxes, completing purchases. Their authority is kernel-grade, but it comes without what classical systems security requires: a trusted mediator interposed on every access. Operating-system vendors are now rebuilding the platform around this de-facto agent kernel, inheriting complete mediation as a design problem. We systematize the security of such systems around a single distinction: a crossing mediated over provenance admits a deterministic check, while one over content semantics does not. A trust-boundary taxonomy locates where mediation must occur and isolates the central mediation gap at two kinds of semantic judgment: distinguishing data from instruction in untrusted input, and an authorized action from an unauthorized one. We argue that this gap leaves an irreducible residual of undetected attacks wherever inputs and actions are not restricted in advance to an enumerated set. The same distinction makes attack-success statistics actionable, placing each number on a spectrum from deployment debt (a sound deterministic mediator left unused) to a structural gap (no such mediator known). We systematize defenses across runtime monitoring, architectural separation, and authorization, and show that current evaluations tend to overstate deployed security through evaluation-validity failures. Finally, we carry that analysis forward beyond the de-facto kernel, to an architecture in which the model itself becomes the arbitration core, and derive the design constraints, open challenges, and research agenda for a security-first AI-native OS.
Abstract:Large language model agents are now privileged principals that take consequential actions: editing code repositories, operating inboxes, completing purchases. Their authority is kernel-grade, but it comes without what classical systems security requires: a trusted mediator interposed on every access. Operating-system vendors are now rebuilding the platform around this de-facto agent kernel, inheriting complete mediation as a design problem. We systematize the security of such systems around a single distinction: a crossing mediated over provenance admits a deterministic check, while one over content semantics does not. A trust-boundary taxonomy locates where mediation must occur and isolates the central mediation gap at two kinds of semantic judgment: distinguishing data from instruction in untrusted input, and an authorized action from an unauthorized one. We argue that this gap leaves an irreducible residual of undetected attacks wherever inputs and actions are not restricted in advance to an enumerated set. The same distinction makes attack-success statistics actionable, placing each number on a spectrum from deployment debt (a sound deterministic mediator left unused) to a structural gap (no such mediator known). We systematize defenses across runtime monitoring, architectural separation, and authorization, and show that current evaluations tend to overstate deployed security through evaluation-validity failures. Finally, we carry that analysis forward beyond the de-facto kernel, to an architecture in which the model itself becomes the arbitration core, and derive the design constraints, open challenges, and research agenda for a security-first AI-native OS.
Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Operating Systems (cs.OS)
arXiv:2609.23700 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2609.23700v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.23700 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 336 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Links #3: 2026/06 Part 1
LessWrong · 15 iun. 2026

UltraQuant on AMD Instinct: More Efficient Agentic Serving for Qwen3.8-MXFP4
AMD · 25 sept. 2026

[AINews] Meta Muse Wonder & Wonder Full: MSL’s Claude 5.5-tier Frontier Model
Latent Space · 13 oct. 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · 7 iun. 2026