Personal large language model (LLM) agents increasingly perform tasks that require access to user data, raising concerns about appropriate data disclosure. We show that relying solely on LLMs to make data-sharing decisions is insufficient. Prompting LLMs to ground their decisions on contextual privacy norms fails to capture individual users’ privacy preferences, while providing prior user data-sharing decisions through in-context learning (ICL) leads to unreliable and opaque reasoning. To address these limitations, we propose ARIEL (Agentic Reasoning with Individualized Entailment Logic), a framework that combines LLMs with rule-based logic to enable structured, personalized privacy reasoning. The core mechanism of ARIEL determines whether a user’s prior decision on a data-sharing request logically entails the same decision for a new request. Experimental evaluations using advanced models and public datasets show that ARIEL reduces the F1 error rate for appropriate judgments by 40.6% compared to standard ICL-based reasoning, indicating that ARIEL is effective at correctly judging requests where the user would approve data sharing. These results demonstrate that integrating LLMs with logical entailment provides an effective and interpretable approach for automating personalized privacy decisions.

We study the ability of language models to reason about appropriate information disclosure - a central aspect of the evolving field of agentic privacy. Whereas previous works have focused on evaluating a model's ability to align with human decisions, we examine the role of ambiguity and missing context on model performance when making information-sharing decisions. We identify context ambiguity as a crucial barrier for high performance in privacy assessments. By designing Camber, a framework for context disambiguation, we show that model-generated decision rationales can reveal ambiguities and that systematically disambiguating context based on these rationales leads to significant accuracy improvements (up to 13.3% in precision and up to 22.3% in recall) as well as reductions in prompt sensitivity. Overall, our results indicate that approaches for context disambiguation are a promising way forward to enhance agentic privacy reasoning.

Data poisoning is an attack on machine learning models wherein the attacker adds examples to the training set to manipulate the behavior of the model at test time. This paper explores poisoning attacks on neural nets. The proposed attacks use ``clean-labels''; they don't require the attacker to have any control over the labeling of training data. They are also targeted; they control the behavior of the classifier on a specific test instance without degrading overall classifier performance. For example, an attacker could add a seemingly innocuous image (that is properly labeled) to a training set for a face recognition engine, and control the identity of a chosen person at test time. Because the attacker does not need to control the labeling function, poisons could be entered into the training set simply by putting them online and waiting for them to be scraped by a data collection bot. We present an optimization-based method for crafting poisons, and show that just one single poison image can control classifier behavior when transfer learning is used. For full end-to-end training, we present a ``watermarking'' strategy that makes poisoning reliable using multiple (approx. 50) poisoned training instances. We demonstrate our method by generating poisoned frog images from the CIFAR dataset and using them to manipulate image classifiers.