DATABANK

Tool Use Enables Undetectable Steganography in Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Jimmy Laurence Rippin, Simon C. Marshall, David Demitri Africa, Christian Schroeder de Witt

Increasingly autonomous agentic AI systems pose novel multi-agent risks, such as secret collusion via covert communication channels. The natural defence to these collusion attempts is to monitor plain-text communication, but the efficacy of monitors has been called into doubt by increasingly sophisticated model steganography; indeed, some theoretical schemes have been proposed that are information-theoretically or computationally indistinguishable from good-faith plain-text communication. In this paper, we demonstrate that the complexity of these schemes is no longer a safety barrier, as agentic coding models can already produce undetectable stegosystems when given realistic tool usage, such as code execution or accessing research papers through web searches. Agents also adapt when key ingredients are missing, for example, by adding model-sampling components or implementing related keyed coding schemes. We then frame tacit steganographic coordination between agents as a Schelling-point problem and introduce coordination metrics for estimating when two agents are likely to select compatible schemes without explicit prior agreement. Our results suggest a shift in the threat model for covert communication between AI agents, where the main barrier is no longer whether frontier agents can understand and implement sophisticated stegosystems, but coordination: whether independently acting agents can converge on compatible schemes, keys, and parameters. We find substantial convergence on broad scheme families but limited strict one-shot coordination, suggesting that shared artefacts, repeated interaction, and tool-mediated search are the settings where covert communication risks are most acute. Overall, our findings provide empirical grounding for the recent strategic confinement hypothesis, which assumes that capable agents can construct covert channels that survive monitoring.

Figure 1: Coordination and implementation outcomes across model capability and environment. Each line corresponds to one setting in the 2×2×2 factorial; marker shape indicates whether undetectability was required, colour indicates keying regime, and line style indicates common-knowledge framing. More capable models generally achieve higher implementation success and higher partial coordination, especially on algorithm choice (ACI) and individual hyperparameters (HCI). However, strict complete coordination (CCI) remains near zero in most settings, showing that exact agreement on all decoding-relevant choices is the main bottleneck. From Jimmy Laurence Rippin et al. (2026), arXiv license.

Not packaged. A REPS package would add charts and verified data.How to package an experiment