When Agents Talk, Secrets Travel: Topology-Driven Leakage and Recipient-Conditioned Sanitization in Multi-Agent LLM Systems
cs.CR, cs.AI, cs.CL
Submitted: 2026-10-12
Updated: 2026-10-12
Code: https://github.com/run-llama/llama_index
Project page: https://openai.github.io/openai-agents-python
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: Multi-agent LLM systems (MALS) introduce a privacy-leakage problem that conventional sensitivity-based defenses miss, since information disclosed to one authorized agent can propagate through routine
Abstract
Multi-agent LLM systems (MALS) introduce a privacy-leakage problem that conventional sensitivity-based defenses miss, since information disclosed to one authorized agent can propagate through routine coordination to an unauthorized one, without compromise or malicious behavior. This motivates topology-aware enforcement that blocks unauthorized propagation while preserving authorized disclosure. We evaluate 485 scenarios across coordinator-worker, peer-to-peer, and hierarchical topologies, instrumenting seven communication channels and measuring surface leakage and disclosure to topology-introduced recipients. We introduce RECONS, a Detect -> Decide -> Transform sanitizer conditioning intervention on recipient and execution context rather than sensitivity alone. Topology changes where protected information propagates, with disclosure to topology-introduced recipients rising from 0% to 52.2% while surface leakage stays nearly flat at 60.6-62.8%. This effect persists across four generator models and a second orchestration framework, though magnitude and relay paths differ; framework choice separately drives a 150x leakage spread, so topology alone is not sufficient. RECONS reduces residual disclosure from 96.7% without sanitization to 29.25%, preserving 94.1% of authorized disclosures versus 20.5% under blanket redaction. Detection coverage is the dominant bottleneck, accounting for 95.5% of residual disclosures. These results show that privacy enforcement in MALS must reason about the recipient and communication path realized at runtime, not sensitivity or topology assumptions alone.
Sources
- Information-Theoretic Privacy Control for Sequential Multi-Agent LLM Systems
- Pr$\epsilon\epsilon$mpt: Sanitizing Sensitive Prompts for LLMs
- Securing AI Agents with Information-Flow Control
- Multi-Agent Firewall Architecture for Privacy Protection of Sensitive Data in Interactions with Language Models
- Sentinel Agents for Secure and Trustworthy Agentic AI in Multi-Agent Systems
- SRPG: Semantically Reconstructed Privacy Guard for Zero-Trust Privacy in Educational Multi-Agent Systems
- MAGPIE: A benchmark for Multi-AGent contextual PrIvacy Evaluation
- Toward Secure LLM Agents: Threat Surfaces, Attacks, Defenses, and Evaluation
- AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents
- AgentGuard: An Attribute-Based Access Control Framework for Tool-Use LLM-Based Agent
- The Sum Leaks More Than Its Parts: Compositional Privacy Risks and Mitigations in Multi-Agent Collaboration
- Multi-Agent Collaboration Mechanisms: A Survey of LLMs
- AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation
- GAMA: A General Anonymizing Multi-Agent System for Privacy Preservation Enhanced by Domain Rules and Disproof Mechanism
Related papers
- SoK: AI-Augmented Binary Reversing
- Relaxed Sender Anonymity for CBDC Interbank Settlement: A Zero-Knowledge Approach on Permissioned EVM
- Calibration-Family Overfit: Why Trusted Sabotage Monitors Don't Transfer Across Lineages
- Efficient Fuzzy PSI under One-Sided Assumptions
- Sealing the Audit-Runtime Gap for LLM Skills
- Token Composition: A Graph Based on EVM Logs