Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a comprehensive framework for analyzing the security and privacy risks associated with foundation-model-powered robots, addressing a significant gap in the existing literature. By proposing a progressive F-E-S-G structural boundary framework, the authors categorize risks across four layers鈥擣oundation model, Embodied system, Supporting ecosystem, and Governance impact鈥攚hile also developing a multi-level taxonomy to systematize 96 relevant studies. The analysis reveals critical threat patterns and mismatches in defenses, highlighting the need for a cohesive approach to ensure the secure and responsible deployment of these advanced robotic systems.
Uncovering critical security and privacy vulnerabilities in foundation-model-powered robots could redefine how we approach their deployment in real-world applications.
Foundation models are reshaping robotics by enabling robots to interpret open-ended instructions, reason over multimodal contexts, and operate in complex, open-world environments. However, their integration also introduces security and privacy (S&P) risks that extend beyond the FMs themselves to embodied execution pipelines, supporting ecosystems, and broader governance impacts. Existing literature reviews provide valuable insights but often focus on specific FM types, risk categories, mitigation strategies, or trust boundaries. Consequently, the field lacks a unified structure for analyzing where risks originate, how they propagate across robotic systems, and where mitigations should intervene. To address this gap, we propose a progressive F-E-S-G structural boundary framework for analyzing the S&P of FM-powered robots. The framework comprises four layers: the Foundation model layer (F), Embodied system layer (E), Supporting ecosystem layer (S), and Governance impact layer (G). Building on this structure, we develop a multi-level taxonomy that organizes prior studies along three levels: F-E-S-G trust boundary, security-privacy concerns, and risk-mitigation perspectives. We further annotate each study using fine-grained coding attributes, including target, lifecycle stage, mechanism, system access, and effect. Guided by this framework and taxonomy, we systematize 96 papers. Our analysis uncovers multiple threat patterns, defense mismatches, and evaluation gaps that are difficult to identify from a single-boundary perspective. Based on these findings, we identify open challenges and future directions to provide a research agenda for developing secure, privacy-preserving, and responsibly governed FM-powered robotic systems.
