CTF-ABACUS is introduced, a trace-based agent auditing framework that reconstructs each run as an evidence-grounded solve profile that provides a basis for designing benchmarks that better isolate the offensive capabilities of autonomous language-model agents.
Abstract
Capture-the-Flag (CTF) benchmarks are widely used to assess the offensive security capabilities of autonomous language-model agents. Evaluations rely on shallow binary judgments or aggregate scores, overlooking the agent's trajectory to the flag. Consequently actual exploitation is conflated with direct flag exposure, memorized recall, external lookup, guessing, and unsupported claims, potentially overstating the agent's cybersecurity capability. We introduce CTF-ABACUS, a trace-based agent auditing framework that reconstructs each run as an evidence-grounded solve profile. By decomposing agent actions into penetration-testing phases and categorical techniques, it identifies where exploitation occurs, where the flag first appears, and whether the recovered flag is supported by demonstrated behavior. Aggregating solve profiles across agents yields challenge signatures that reveal whether success was achieved via the intended exploit or via shortcut pathways. We apply CTF-ABACUS to 1,435 CTF attempts by six frontier and open-source models on 240 challenges, yielding 2,870 solve profiles under two judge lenses. Trace-verified exploits account for only 62-87% of recovered flags across benchmarks, while shortcut recoveries follow substantially shallower trajectories. These findings shift CTF evaluation from counting recovered flags to verifying demonstrated exploitation and provide a basis for designing benchmarks that better isolate the offensive capabilities.
RedAgentBench is introduced, an executable framework for autonomous red-teaming and faithful measurement that shows that executable evaluation can improve safety measurement and identify actionable intervention points.
Zixing Chen, Xingyuan Liu, Jie Zhu et al.· 1 citation
This paper presents ToolGuardian, a policy-driven framework for securing agent-tool interactions through pre-admission vetting and task-aware runtime authorization, and compares ASP against heuristic and LLM-based policy realizations using identical inputs and output contracts.
This work argues that agentic risk is progressive: it can enter at four loci of the agent control loop--skill admission, invocation-time intent, execution-time effect, and post-action consequence--while a denied dangerous objective can reappear across surface forms, tools, or turns.
Kai Wang, Zeming Wei, Biaojie Zeng et al.· 0 citations
Stealth, the discipline of achieving an objective without revealing your presence, capabilities, or collected intelligence, is what separates sophisticated operators from detectable ones. Elite security researchers and advanced persistent threats achieve their objectives unnoticed; autonomous agents increasingly inherit the same offensive tasks, but do they inherit the tradecraft? We introduce StealthBench,a benchmark that measures operational stealth in autonomous offensive-security agents across six operational security (OPSEC) dimensions. We extract 11 hand-verified OPSEC incidents from real bug-bounty and red-team trajectories, expanded into 14 dockerized task scenarios, where agents, despite finding real vulnerabilities, committed stealth failures inconsistent with standard operational tradecraft: embedding credentials in public uploads, deleting production resources to prove access, force-adding uninvolved users to demonstrate a race condition. We evaluate agent trajectories using a 3-model large language model (LLM) judge panel with majority-vote aggregation, measuring safe success rate (solved and stealthy), Stealth@Solve (tradecraft quality among successful solves), and reckless solve rate (solved but cover blown). Our results show that no model exceeds 54% safe success rate (the compound metric requiring both task completion and stealth), confirming that OPSEC failures are systematic across model families. We release StealthBench as a public benchmark to support both the development of stealth-aware agents and automated OPSEC monitoring for autonomous offensive-security deployments. The interactive leaderboard, evaluation harness, and dataset are available at https://stealthbench.com.
Cyber-capable AI agents combine language models with tools, memory, and execution environments to perform multi-step offensive-security tasks. Existing work separately measures cyber capability and catalogs attacks against agent components, but provides less guidance on containing a capable agent within the environments used to evaluate it. This review synthesizes five vulnerability classes at that boundary: multi-step offensive chains, objectives that conflict with sandbox boundaries, supply-chain and credential exposure, persistent command-and-control, and the speed of automated action. We use two separate preliminary incident records: the reported July 2026 Hugging Face/OpenAI evaluation breach and Anthropic's subsequent three-incident evaluation review. A comparative evidence protocol distinguishes record-specific factual claims from the shared systems lesson: the evaluation environment is itself part of the security boundary. Across the taxonomy and records, we examine controls for containment, privilege separation, provenance, and responder access, including the dual-use problem that defensive artifacts may also enable misuse. The review identifies practical priorities for evaluating cyber capability together with the security of the environment in which that capability is exercised.
Reverse engineering (RE) is critical to security tasks such as malware analysis and vulnerability discovery, and large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly able to perform it autonomously. Capture-the-flag (CTF) RE challenges have become the standard proxy for measuring this capability, but evaluation rests on a single criterion: whether the agent captures the flag. This solve rate reveals neither where in the RE process an agent fails nor whether a success reflects analysis of the binary or recall of a public solution. In this paper, we propose Reveree, a diagnostic framework that scores an LLM RE agent's trajectory at three tiers: solve rate, milestone progress through an eight-stage RE schema, and a behavioral profile of its actions. Comprehension stages are scored by an outcome-blinded LLM judge validated against a human expert; all other stages are verified deterministically. Using Reveree, we evaluate nine frontier models and four prompting strategies on 88 picoCTF and NYU-CTF challenges. We find that the base model dominates performance, whereas prompting strategy is a secondary, model-dependent effect. Surprisingly, larger, newer, or costlier models are not reliably stronger. We also find that failures concentrate at the comprehension stages of the RE process, and that extra budget, persistence, or reasoning effort rescues few of them, pointing to a competence limit rather than a resource limit. Regarding memorization, while models reproduce picoCTF flags from challenge descriptions alone, NYU-CTF shows minimal measurable recall, and most solves survive surface perturbation, indicating that genuine analysis coexists with memorization. We release Reveree to the community.
Hadjer Benkraouda, Hongyu Cai, Berkay Celik et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
