Research
Capable but Careless： Do Computer-Use Agents Follow Contextual Integrity？
能力强但粗心：计算机使用智能体是否遵循情境完整性？
Capable but Careless: Do Computer-Use Agents Follow Contextual Integrity?
arXiv.orgComputer-use agents (CUAs) now act on a user's behalf across personal applications such as email, calendars, and to-do lists. This cross-application access is useful, but it also creates a privacy risk that has been largely overlooked: when an agent works in one context, it can pull in information from another that is inappropriate in that context. Hence, we introduce AgentCIBench, an evaluation harness that turns this risk into executable, deterministically scored scenarios. We target three common failure modes in CUAs: visual co-location, where the agent pulls in prohibited items that sit next to the task target in the UI; task-ambiguity overshare, where the agent dumps dense personal state in response to an under-specified prompt; and recipient misalignment, where the agent sends content to an addressee for whom it is inappropriate. We evaluate 15 frontier agents and find a surprisingly high failure rate: 11 of 15 leak on more than 50% of scenarios, with an average leakage of 67.9%, and the same failures persist when agents act end-to-end in the environment to complete the task. We release AgentCIBench to encourage the development of safer computer-use agents and position contextual disclosure testing as a pre-deployment safety check.
Open sourceRecommended because
This is worth tracking because it is a concrete research signal, not just a passing headline. The source preview points to a research result, method, evaluation, dataset, or safety finding. For builders and operators, "Capable but Careless： Do Computer-Use Agents Follow Contextual Integrity？" can be used as a checkpoint for technical due diligence, roadmap bets, agent design, and evaluation strategy. I keep this thread indexed so future searches around AI research papers, technical methods, and applied AI systems can land on a source-linked page instead of disappearing into a fast-moving feed from arXiv.org.
What to take from this signal
Context
"Capable but Careless： Do Computer-Use Agents Follow Contextual Integrity？" is archived here as a source-linked AI signal from arXiv.org. The useful part is the connection between Capable, Careless, Computer-Use, Agents, Follow and technical due diligence, roadmap bets, agent design, and evaluation strategy, which makes the item more actionable than a normal feed headline. The source context says: Computer-use agents (CUAs) now act on a user's behalf across personal applications such as email, calendars, and to-do lists. This cross-application access is useful, but it also creates a privacy risk that has been largely overlooked: when an agent works in one context, it can pull in information from another that is inappropriate in that context. Hence, we introduce AgentCIBench, an evaluation harness that turns this risk into executable, deterministically scored scenarios. We target three common failure modes in CUAs: visual co-location, where the agent pulls in prohibited items that sit next to the task target in the UI; task-ambiguity overshare, where the agent dumps dense personal state in response to an under-specified prompt; and recipient misalignment, where the agent sends content to an addressee for whom it is inappropriate. We evaluate 15 frontier agents and find a surprisingly high failure rate: 11 of 15 leak on more than 50% of scenarios, with an average leakage of 67.9%, and the same failures persist when agents act end-to-end in the environment to complete the task. We release AgentCIBench to encourage the development of safer computer-use agents and position contextual disclosure testing as a pre-deployment safety check.
Builder takeaway
For an AI builder, the main takeaway is to watch how this signal changes practical decisions around technical feasibility, evaluation design, safety limits, and product primitives. It can inform what to test next, which product surface to compare, and whether the underlying workflow is ready for real users.
Source context
arXiv.org remains the authoritative source for the original claim. This page adds a stable archive URL, a short builder interpretation, and related search language so the item can be found later when the original feed has moved on.
Search angles
- Capable but Careless： Do Computer-Use Agents Follow Contextual Integrity？ Research context
- arXiv.org AI research
- Capable, Careless, Computer-Use, Agents, Follow builder takeaway
- AI research papers, technical methods, and applied AI systems
This page keeps a source preview and a stable archive URL for search discovery. The original source remains authoritative.