Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

SAGA: A Security Architecture for Governing AI Agentic Systems

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2504.21034 v2 pith:QPFYCRFY submitted 2025-04-27 cs.CR cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.CRcs.AIcs.LG
keywords agentsagenticagentcontrolarchitecturesagasecurityaccess
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents increasingly interact, collaborate, and delegate tasks to one another autonomously with minimal human interaction. Industry guidelines for agentic system governance emphasize the need for users to maintain comprehensive control over their agents, mitigating potential damage from malicious agents. Several proposed agentic system designs address agent identity, authorization, and delegation, but remain purely theoretical, without concrete implementation and evaluation. Most importantly, they do not provide user-controlled agent management. To address this gap, we propose SAGA, a scalable Security Architecture for Governing Agentic systems, that offers user oversight over their agents' lifecycle. In our design, users register their agents with a central entity, the Provider, that maintains agent contact information, user-defined access control policies, and helps agents enforce these policies on inter-agent communication. We introduce a cryptographic mechanism for deriving access control tokens, that offers fine-grained control over an agent's interaction with other agents, providing formal security guarantees. We evaluate SAGA on several agentic tasks, using agents in different geolocations, and multiple on-device and cloud LLMs, demonstrating minimal performance overhead with no impact on underlying task utility in a wide range of conditions. Our architecture enables secure and trustworthy deployment of autonomous agents, accelerating the responsible adoption of this technology in sensitive environments.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Like a Hammer, It Can Build, It Can Break: Large Language Model Uses, Perceptions, and Adoption in Cybersecurity Operations on Reddit

    cs.CR 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.5 of 10

    Security practitioners use LLMs independently for low-risk productivity tasks while showing interest in enterprise platforms, but reliability, verification needs, and security risks limit broader autonomy.

  2. Hardware Keystores for AI Agent Signing Workflows: A Zero-Trust MCP Enforcement Architecture

    cs.CR 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Hardware key confinement plus a SHA-256 payload commitment and an LLM judge blocked all 12 tested prompt-injection signing attacks and prevented key exfiltration in the protected setup.

  3. Detailed analysis of possible new-physics effects in the semileptonic decay $B_s \to D_s^{(*)}\tau\bar{\nu}$

    hep-ph 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Constraints on beyond-SM Wilson coefficients in B_s → D_s(*) τ ν̄ are derived from data using covariant-quark-model form factors, with full observable predictions for future experiments.

  4. Vibe Coding vs. Agentic Coding: Fundamentals and Practical Implications of Agentic AI

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A qualitative taxonomy positions vibe coding and agentic coding as complementary paradigms rather than rivals in AI-assisted software development.

Pith tools