SpatialTrust: A Benchmark for Environmental Risk Recognition in Secure Authentication

Trust evaluation plays a critical role in cybersecurity by supporting risk mitigation and decision-making. A variety of trust evaluation methods have been proposed, with learning-based approaches offering high accuracy and automation. However, they often require substantial ground truth, suffer from low training efficiency, lack support for basic trust properties, and provide limited explainability. Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a compelling alternative due to their strong zero-/few-shot reasoning abilities and broad knowledge. To this end, we propose LLM4Trust, the first benchmark framework that systematically explores the capabilities of LLMs for trust evaluation. We first construct diverse trust graphs to model five basic trust properties and design corresponding property understanding tasks. We then assess the ability of eight representative LLMs to understand these properties under nine prompt methods. Based on this exploration, we identify the most effective LLM-prompt combinations and apply them to five real-world datasets for validating LLMs' trust evaluation capability. During this process, we propose two strategies to extract key information from large-scale trust graphs, addressing the context window limitations of LLMs. Extensive experiments show that LLMs can effectively understand basic trust properties and have great potential for real-world trust evaluation, particularly under limited supervision. However, they remain vulnerable to attacks targeting trust graphs and demonstration examples used in few-shot prompting, and incur high inference costs. Accordingly, we propose a defense mechanism and batch inference to improve the robustness and efficiency of LLM-based trust evaluation. The source code of LLM4Trust is available at https://github.com/Jieerbobo/LLM4Trust

While Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly deployed in safety-critical domains, their reliability is threatened by multimodal implicit risks. Unlike explicit threats, these hazards emerge when individually benign text and neutral visual entities logically converge to induce unsafe outputs. Current detection methods fail to address this because they overlook the underlying risk activation mechanisms that govern cross-modal risk activation, leading to single-modality shortcut learning and hallucinated rationalizations. To bridge this gap, we first construct TriggerBench, the first dataset explicitly modeling risk compositionality (5,600 instances). By formally isolating Key Elements and Trigger Elements to build counterfactual contrastive pairs, TriggerBench eliminates risk residues and forces models to perform genuine logical deduction rather than superficial pattern matching, which provides a rigorous foundation for both large-scale training and fine-grained evaluation. Building on this, we propose a Step-Supervised Structured Reasoning training framework and employ it to train ThinkingGuard, a specialized guard model. Inspired by Situation Awareness theory, we decouple implicit risk identification into progressive cognitive stages, and utilize a step-reward Monte Carlo Tree Search algorithm to explore optimal reasoning trajectories, which are then distilled into the model through Dual-Constraint Preference Alignment. Extensive experiments across both standard and implicit safety benchmarks demonstrate that ThinkingGuard achieves strong performance. Project resources are available at https://github.com/FroggyChen/ThinkingGuard.

Current LLM safety benchmarks largely rely on binary metrics, overlooking how models respond to harmful prompts with varying threat implicitness. We introduce TIER, a Threat Implicitness Benchmark for behavioral safety evaluation of LLMs. TIER covers four risk domains and four threat levels, from explicit harmful requests to sophisticated jailbreaks. Responses are assessed using a six-label behavior scale and two independent LLM judges. Experiments on six open-weight LLMs show that safety behaviors evolve gradually across threat levels rather than shifting directly from refusal to compliance. Contextual prompts yield the most diverse behaviors, while jailbreaks reveal the largest robustness gaps. Furthermore, models with similar Attack Success Rates can exhibit distinct response distributions, highlighting the need for behavior-aware LLM safety evaluation.