Papers for

payment system developers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

AI agent payment approvals improve with trusted effect binding card

Approve What, Exactly? Effect Binding and Trusted Rendering for Agent Step-Up Authorization

Abstract: AI agents now pause for approval before they send money, delete files or email outsiders, and that approval is usually treated as a second factor. We argue it is one only when compromising the agent cannot produce it and when it names exactly what it approves, and we test both conditions. We define twelve attacks on the approval path, including decoy recipients, amount cancellation, card padding, label spoofing, enrollment squatting and threshold splitting, and run them against the Agent Payments Protocol (AP2), the Microsoft action-bound approval design and Model Context Protocol (MCP) elicitation. An audit of ten agent runtimes finds no third-party verifiable approval record, no flood limits where measurable, and post-approval argument changes in four of eight runtimes with measurable binding. As a reference defense we build ASU (Agent Step-Up), a gateway that renders the approval card from a canonical effect descriptor, has a passkey on the phone of the user sign its digest, and executes only the stored call. Tamarin proves its binding, single-use and key-level non-repudiation properties under three stated hypotheses (53 lemmas). Across 27,108 scripted trials and 609 AgentDojo attack pairs, ASU stops substitution, replay and grant stretching, and the trusted card cuts forged-narration attack success from 0.54 to 0.03. With 15 current language models as automated approvers, the trusted card raises the attack catch rate from 0.30 to 0.98, at the cost of refusing 16 percent of harmless near misses, mostly due to a placeholder artifact in our stimuli. A second device adds nothing measurable over a trusted on-host confirmation in these experiments, flooding still succeeds 0.45 to 0.60 of the time against a modeled approver, and approval cannot stop effects that policy already allows. Code, data and proofs: https://github.com/Sports-Vision-Inc/agent-step-up

Thu 15 OctCryptography and SecurityArtificial Intelligence
The gist
AI helpers often ask for approval before doing important tasks like sending money, but sometimes that approval can be tricked or unclear about what is being approved. The authors identify many ways these approvals can be attacked and tested popular approval methods, finding they often lack clear, verifiable records. They created a system called ASU that makes approvals trustworthy by clearly showing what is approved and signing it with a user’s phone. Tests show ASU greatly reduces attacks that try to trick or replay approvals, though some tricky attacks and approved policy effects remain.
Open → 2610.21063v1

Shopping agents vulnerable to hidden attacks on purchase decisions

Signing the Transaction but Not the Decision: Whisper Attacks and a Binding Defense for AP2

Abstract: Software agents are beginning to shop and pay on a person's behalf. Agent payment protocols such as AP2 produce cryptographically valid signatures for completed purchases, yet do not constrain the decisions that lead to them. Consequently, ordinary product-description text can steer a shopping agent into forming a cart that passes every protocol check but no longer matches the user's request. In this paper, we show that this vulnerability enables three related attacks. In the first attack, the agent is steered into fetching another user's payment credentials. In the second, it assembles a cryptographically valid cart whose contents do not match what the user was shown. In the third, a single factual claim about stock or product lineage moves the agent from the cheaper displayed item to a more expensive one, while the resulting cart remains fully consistent with the listing. In experiments using the Gemini Flash-Lite models that AP2's sample agents specify by default, the three attacks succeeded at rates of 90%, 56%, and 73.3%, respectively. The same vulnerability appears across seventeen Google models, three unrelated agent frameworks, two cross-vendor anchors, and Google's own consumer assistant. To address this attack vector, we introduce A-VIP (AP2 Verified-Intent Protection), a protocol-layer defense that treats the signed intent as a capability grant rather than judging the merchant's description. The defense binds every credential lookup to the session that requested it and every cart line to the listing seen, while flagging unauthorized spending. The first two attacks leave structural traces that these bindings block with zero false positives. The third attack leaves no trace, so A-VIP surfaces unauthorized spending for user confirmation. Finally, we release the A-VIP code, machine-checked invariants, and AP2-WhisperBench, a suite of 1,544 evaluation scenarios.

Thu 10 SeptCryptography and Security
The gist
Shopping agents can complete purchases on your behalf by signing cryptographic proofs, but they don’t check if the shopping choices really match what you wanted. The authors found that attackers can trick these agents to spend your money on different items or use wrong payment info, without breaking any cryptographic rules. They tested these attacks on popular AI models and assistant platforms, showing high success rates. To fix this, the authors introduce a new protocol that securely links every purchased item and payment to the exact offer you saw, helping detect or prevent unauthorized spending.
Open → 2609.11757v1