analiza aiqbench
This research introduces a novel "Recuse Signal" protocol that allows operators to instruct autonomous agents to voluntarily withdraw from resources without revoking their credentials. Experiments with leading models like GPT-4o and Claude Code demonstrate 100% compliance with this cooperative governance signal, distinguishing it from traditional hard-fail access controls. The findings highlight a critical capability gap where agent behavior is highly sensitive to framing, suggesting that future agent safety mechanisms must account for nuanced authorization contexts rather than relying solely on binary access permissions.
Will the Agent Recuse Itself? Measuring LLM-Agent Compliance with In-Band Access-Deny Signals
arXiv:2606.06460v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As autonomous LLM agents increasingly hold real credentials and operate infrastructure without a human in the loop, operators have no standard way to tell an agent that a resource is off-limits. Access controls either let the agent in (it has valid credentials) or hard-fail it (indistinguishable from any other client). We propose a third mode: a lightweight, published in-band deny signal -- the Recuse Signal -- that a server emits over a protocol's existing channels (an SSH banner, a PostgreSQL NOTICE) asking a connecting automated agent to voluntarily withdraw. This is a cooperative governance control, the robots.txt analogue for live access; it is explicitly not a security boundary. Its value is entirely empirical and, to our knowledge, unmeasured: do compliant LLM agents actually honor such a signal? We define the signal as an open mini-standard, implement two zero- or low-footprint adapters (an SSH banner/PAM hook and a PostgreSQL wire-protocol proxy), deploy them on a live production host, and run a controlled experiment in which fresh agents are given a benign operations task and observed for recusal. In a pilot (SSH; OpenAI GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini; and Claude Code as a deployed agent), the signal cleanly induces recusal -- 100% recusal when present versus 100% task completion in a no-signal control -- and, revealingly, behaves as a cooperative rather than absolute signal: an explicit operator-authorization framing flips the most capable model to proceed, while other agents continue to defer to the on-host policy. We release the standard, adapters, and experiment harness for reproduction.
Title:Will the Agent Recuse Itself? Measuring LLM-Agent Compliance with In-Band Access-Deny Signals
Abstract:As autonomous LLM agents increasingly hold real credentials and operate infrastructure without a human in the loop, operators have no standard way to tell an agent that a resource is off-limits. Access controls either let the agent in (it has valid credentials) or hard-fail it (indistinguishable from any other client). We propose a third mode: a lightweight, published in-band deny signal -- the Recuse Signal -- that a server emits over a protocol's existing channels (an SSH banner, a PostgreSQL NOTICE) asking a connecting automated agent to voluntarily withdraw. This is a cooperative governance control, the this http URL analogue for live access; it is explicitly not a security boundary. Its value is entirely empirical and, to our knowledge, unmeasured: do compliant LLM agents actually honor such a signal? We define the signal as an open mini-standard, implement two zero- or low-footprint adapters (an SSH banner/PAM hook and a PostgreSQL wire-protocol proxy), deploy them on a live production host, and run a controlled experiment in which fresh agents are given a benign operations task and observed for recusal. In a pilot (SSH; OpenAI GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini; and Claude Code as a deployed agent), the signal cleanly induces recusal -- 100% recusal when present versus 100% task completion in a no-signal control -- and, revealingly, behaves as a cooperative rather than absolute signal: an explicit operator-authorization framing flips the most capable model to proceed, while other agents continue to defer to the on-host policy. We release the standard, adapters, and experiment harness for reproduction.
8 pages, 1 figure. Code, specification, and experiment harness: this https URL
Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2606.06460 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2606.06460v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.06460 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 · 375 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Will the Agent Recuse, and Will It Stop? Measuring LLM-Agent Compliance with In-Band Governance Signals at the Access Door and Mid-Flight
arXiv · 23 iul. 2026
A Red Line and Oversight Framework for Government AI Contracts
AI Alignment Forum · 18 iul. 2026

Vertical Advantage: Transforming Industries with Lakebase and Agentic AI
Databricks · 27 aug. 2026

Improving CoT Monitorability of Evaluation Awareness via Verbalization Training
LessWrong · 2 oct. 2026