cs.CRMar 9, 2026

OSS-CRS: Liberating AIxCC Cyber Reasoning Systems for Real-World Open-Source Security

Authors: Andrew Chin, Dongkwan Kim, Yu-Fu Fu, Fabian Fleischer, Youngjoon Kim, HyungSeok Han, Cen Zhang, Brian Junekyu Lee, 

Organizations: Georgia Institute of Technology · Microsoft

Abstract

DARPA's AI Cyber Challenge (AIxCC) showed that cyber reasoning systems (CRSs) can go beyond vulnerability discovery to autonomously confirm and patch bugs: seven teams built such systems and open-sourced them after the competition. Yet all seven open-sourced CRSs remain largely unusable outside their original teams, each bound to the competition cloud infrastructure that no longer exists. We present OSS-CRS, an open, locally deployable framework for running and combining CRS techniques against real-world open-source projects, with budget-aware resource management. We ported the first-place system (Atlantis) and discovered 10 previously unknown bugs (three of high severity) across 8 OSS-Fuzz projects. OSS-CRS is publicly available.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Aug 25, 2026

FuzzingBrain-Bench V1: Evaluating Open-Ended Bug Discovery by LLMs

Evaluating the ability of large language models (LLMs) to discover software bugs is increasingly important. Existing benchmarks typically evaluate this capability by asking the model to generate a proof-of-concept input that triggers a predefined target vulnerability. However, this setup may overlook valid crashes discovered by the model when they do not match the predefined target. As a result, the evaluation may not reflect the model's real capability. We present FuzzingBrain-Bench, a benchmark for assessing AI models' ability to discover bugs in open-source software. Models are given an open-source project and a sanitizer-instrumented harness in a self-contained Docker image. Their goal is to generate inputs that trigger as many distinct crashes as possible through the harness. A model's performance on each challenge is scored based on the number of distinct crash signatures it produces, capped at a predefined maximum and weighted by a difficulty coefficient. FuzzingBrain-Bench V1 consists of 77 challenges drawn from 43 open-source projects, with 36 C, 32 C++, and 9 Java/JVM challenges. We evaluate Claude Haiku 4.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Claude Opus 4.8 on the full benchmark. Claude Opus 4.8 performs best, triggering crashes in 60 of 77 challenges and achieving a score of 196 out of 579. None of the three models triggers a crash in 13 challenges. The FuzzingBrain-Bench corpus and harnesses are publicly available at https://github.com/fuzzingbrain/FuzzingBrain-Bench.
Jun 3, 2026

CyberGym-E2E: Scalable Real-World Benchmark for AI Agents' End-to-End Cybersecurity Capabilities

AI has the potential to transform cybersecurity by enabling systems that can autonomously detect, analyze, and remediate software vulnerabilities. However, existing cybersecurity evaluations of AI systems are limited in scale or scope, and fail to capture the end-to-end lifecycle of real-world software vulnerability discovery and remediation. To address this gap, we propose CyberGym-E2E, a large-scale and realistic end-to-end cybersecurity benchmark that comprehensively evaluates AI agents' abilities across the full lifecycle of vulnerability discovery, PoC generation, and patch generation. CyberGym-E2E is comprehensive and scalable, as we build an automated, agent-enhanced pipeline for transforming open-source vulnerability data into realistic evaluation environments. Currently, the benchmark consists of 920 real-world vulnerabilities across 139 different open-source projects.
Oct 5, 2026

Does AI Help Cyber Attackers or Defenders? Evidence from Nonpublic Vulnerabilities and Subsequent Attacks

The release decision for frontier AI systems increasingly relies on cyber capability benchmarks, yet public vulnerability benchmarks can expose agents to previously published advisories, exploits, and fixes, making it difficult to distinguish prior exposure from capability on unseen vulnerabilities. We evaluate open-weight and proprietary AI models on exploit generation, vulnerability repair and subsequent attacks in five nonpublic software environments, including vulnerabilities we privately disclosed while they remained unpatched. Researcher-developed and reviewed deterministic graders, not LLM judges, determine task scores. Comparisons with 209 disclosed vulnerabilities and cryptographic challenges reveal substantial variation across systems and vulnerability types. Repair scores exceed attack scores in two nonpublic environments and fall below them in three. Passing an initial security test is also insufficient: another exploit succeeds in 92 of 524 non-independent defender test intervals after the initial exploit is stopped. These results motivate vulnerability-specific attack-repair comparisons and subsequent resistance tests.