Higher Attack Success Rates

A self-check defense asks the target model to assess a request before answering it; SAGE, the strongest published instance, reports an average 99% defense success rate. We show it can be breached by composing two attacks that are individually harmless against it: an established code-completion encoding and an established best-of-N search, neither of which exceeds 4.7% of behaviors alone. Composed, with the search budget spent on the encoding, they reach 67/22/15% across three open targets, and the effect persists on a 70B target. We then explain the composition rather than only reporting it. First, a self-check defense borrows its strength from the target: SAGE does not detect the attack, it asks the model to, and the four targets convert that request into an explicit refusal between 32% and 97% of the time, which orders the spread in defended coverage even though undefended reach is near-identical. Second, which attack survives is decided by the type of defense, and it inverts: against transform defenses the code encoding retains far more of its undefended reach than the character search, while against gate defenses the ordering flips. We account for this with the number of independent probes an attack delivers to a defense's decision boundary. Finally, we report a validity defect we found and repaired in our own pipeline, a deterministic attack under greedy decoding has no best-of-N variation channel at all, and give the one-line diagnostic that detects it. All claims rest on 310,000 generations scored by a human-validated judge.

Safety classifiers ("guards") are the dominant black-box defense for vision-language models, yet a guard judges an input's surface form, not its meaning: a harmful request re-encoded as set theory, formal logic, a classical language, code, or text rendered inside an image slips past a guard that would block it in plain language - the decode gap. The standard fix is a preprocessor that recovers image content and decodes the encoding before the guard. We build one and evaluate it against an ensemble of eleven published encoding attacks, counting a behavior as broken if any attack succeeds. That metric separates two mechanisms such defenses conflate. Restoring a view the guard never had improves it on both axes at once: it blocks far more attacks, and, measured on a category-balanced benign set, it blocks fewer benign requests, because restating a request normalizes the borderline phrasing a classifier over-flags. It still does not make the system safer: against an attacker free to choose among eleven encodings, closing one channel relocates the success rather than removing it, and no ensemble contrast survives multiple-comparison correction. What does lower ensemble attack success is re-screening the recovered pre-decode surface, and that step is where the entire benign cost falls. The safety-utility trade-off is therefore not a property of recovery; it is localized to one step. Across the full guard x target x condition factorial, no configuration reaches an ensemble attack-success rate at or below 40% while holding benign over-refusal under 70%. The per-attack averages usually reported understate the attacker roughly fourfold, which is why this frontier is easy to miss. Composing across defense families is the one lever that moved the safety axis, beating every configuration we measured, and still landing far outside any deployable refusal budget.

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.

Machine-learning services increasingly rely on public data, third-party providers, and outsourced training, creating opportunities for data-poisoning attacks that implant persistent malicious behavior while preserving benign utility. However, existing backdoor studies largely evaluate exact trigger reuse, training-exposed trigger diversity, or variations along predefined transformation axes. They therefore leave a critical blind spot: whether a backdoor learned from one training-time trigger can generalize to an inference-time trigger family absent from victim training. We formulate this problem as backdoor generalization under training--inference trigger shift and introduce Lilith, a black-box anchor-to-family framework. Using only disjoint surrogate resources, Lilith first induces a compact target-side vulnerability with a single training anchor, then constructs a bounded inference-only family that preserves the anchor-induced representation geometry. We characterize this mechanism through anchor clearance and family reach, deriving sufficient conditions for family-wise target preservation under local regularity and bounded surrogate--victim discrepancy. Experiments across datasets, architectures, poisoning rates, and defenses show that Lilith achieves high family-wise attack success with limited utility degradation and a small trigger generalization gap. Additional analyses show that family activation depends on representation alignment rather than the proposal mechanism, exposing a broader threat overlooked by exact-trigger evaluation.

A growing number of applications, such as biometrics and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), rely on cosine similarity scores computed between vector embeddings of text, images, or audio. These systems return similarity scores through their APIs for ranking and verification. However, such releases can leak information about individual records and enable membership inference attacks. While differential privacy (DP) provides a principled metric for quantifying attack risks, naïve application of DP mechanisms---such as adding i.i.d. Gaussian noise to vector entries---leads to excessive distortion (i.e., low utility) at a given privacy constraint that scales poorly with the number of released scores. We propose \textsc{ScoreShield}, a perturb-then-project mechanism that adds Gaussian noise calibrated to global sensitivity of the chosen score release regime and then projects the result onto the feasibility set of valid cosine objects. \textsc{ScoreShield} satisfies $(\varepsilon,δ)$-DP for releasing similarity score vectors and Gram matrices. We provide utility guarantees for the exact Frobenius metric projection used in the risk analysis, and prove convergence to feasibility for the practical averaged alternating-projection solver used for large-scale Gram releases. For full pairwise cosine Gram release under record-level replacement adjacency, the exact-projection bound improves the $n$-dependence of squared Frobenius risk from $Θ(n^3)$ for the naïve Gaussian baseline to $\mathcal{O}(n^2)$ for fixed privacy parameters, with sharper local bounds at low-rank Grams. We evaluate the mechanism across RAG, face recognition, semantic retrieval, image similarity, and recommender-system tasks.

Ultraconstructive Model Theory (UCMT) replaces idealized satisfaction, at finite compu- tational scale, by bounded adversarial survival. A finite partial structure is tested by an Opponent (Devil) drawing legal challenges from a bounded attack surface, repaired by a Builder (God) through legal replies, and certified by a symbolic Judge

Language-model agents act through structured tool calls whose arguments carry very different risks: untrusted content may legitimately shape an email body but should never set a recipient, account, command, or credential. Existing conformal risk control methods certify a tool call as a whole, so a failure in one rare high-risk field can be averaged away by the many benign arguments around it, leaving the argument that causes harm uncertified. We introduce role-stratified per-field conformal risk control, a calibration layer that wraps any per-field detector and assigns a separate threshold and risk budget to each semantic argument role. We show that aggregate certification pays a price of coarseness, tightening a rare role's effective budget in proportion to how often that role appears, whereas role-stratified calibration certifies each sufficiently sampled role directly with a finite-sample guarantee and pools the rarest roles. Across AgentDojo and InjecAgent with six language models, our method achieves the most consistent role-specific budget compliance among the methods we evaluate under model and attack transfer, detector noise, gradual drift, unseen tool suites, and adaptive attacks, providing formal per-role guarantees under exchangeability or after recalibration. These results suggest that structured tool calls should be certified at the semantic-role level, not the whole action.

Large language models (LLMs) used as listwise rerankers in recommendation systems suffer from position bias when serializing candidate sets into prompts. We show this order sensitivity creates an exploitable attack surface: an attacker can promote a label-0 target into the top-$k$ solely by reordering candidates, without changing item content, labels, or model parameters. We introduce $\mathrm{promo}@k$ to quantify this vulnerability, measuring the fraction of label-0 targets that can be elevated into top-$k$ rankings via permutation. Evaluating across three domains (MovieLens, Amazon Books, and Amazon Fashion), $\mathrm{promo}@5$ reaches up to 0.57 at an attack budget of $R$ = 50 orderings. Furthermore, ordinary permutation stability predicts vulnerability without running the attack. While a bidirectional T5 encoder scorer reduces exposure, permutation-consistency regularization and architectural invariance effectively mitigate it. Pointwise scoring avoids the bias issue but degrades ranking quality. These results demonstrate that input candidate order in listwise LLM reranking is a security-relevant attack vector. Code and data are available at https://github.com/geoz-lab/position_bias_attack.

As Video Large Language Models are increasingly deployed in real-world applications, ensuring their safety alignment has become critical. Counterintuitively, we find that harmful videos paired with benign queries achieve higher attack success rates than the same videos paired with explicitly harmful queries. To understand the underlying mechanism of this vulnerability, we present V-DEAL, a three-level diagnostic framework that jointly analyzes this failure across model behaviour, understanding, and internal representations. By progressively ruling out perception failure and quantifying the model's internal refusal tendency, V-DEAL provides a new diagnostic perspective for analyzing the underlying mechanism of the observed vulnerability. We tested six Video LLMs on three public benchmarks and observed that models correctly recognize harmful video content with over 81% accuracy, yet the average attack success rate still reaches 48.33% under the condition pairing harmful videos with benign queries. Hidden-state analysis further shows that visual understanding activates a weaker refusal tendency than textual understanding. Furthermore, we introduce a prompt injection intervention method that reduces attack success rates by an average of 48.24 percentage points and achieves performance comparable to prior fine-tuning-based methods, providing an effective and practical means to address such safety risks in Video LLMs.

Large language models increasingly use search tools to retrieve up-to-date information, introducing a new attack surface in which retrieved documents can be manipulated. This risk is amplified by the development of generative engine optimization, which can make selected content more likely to be retrieved, cited, and adopted by models. Existing fact-verification benchmarks and evaluation frameworks do not provide the controlled evidence environments needed to assess robustness against GEO poisoning. We therefore propose GPE, which consists of a multi-domain fact-verification benchmark and an evaluation framework for controlling evidence sources and poisoning ratios. Experiments across multiple verification methods and poisoning attacks demonstrate that GPE exposes robustness degradation and efficiency trade-offs that cannot be observed through clean evaluation alone, confirming the need to evaluate fact verification under adversarial evidence environments.

Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) reports richly describe real-world attack processes, but their unstructured narratives cannot be directly used for automated attack-path reasoning. Existing CTI extraction methods focus on indicators, entities, or TTP labels without modeling the execution conditions and resulting states of each attack step, so the extracted knowledge supports neither state matching nor reachability analysis across multi-stage attack chains. This paper proposes an automated framework that extracts reachable attack chains by modeling each attack step as an attack unit of preconditions, an attack behavior, and postconditions. A multi-stage pipeline assisted by large language models (LLMs) extracts attack behavior skeletons, recovers their preconditions and postconditions, normalizes them into predefined predicates, and repairs broken dependencies; the resulting units are compiled into Datalog-style rules for attack-goal reachability reasoning. On a dataset of 20 CTI reports containing 334 human-validated annotated steps, our framework achieves higher annotated-step coverage than representative CTI extraction systems in recovering attack behaviors. Moreover, by explicitly generating preconditions and postconditions, it produces attack units that are more complete and consistent than those generated by end-to-end LLM baselines. On the extracted chains, Datalog inference reaches the specified attack goal in 19 of 20 reports, while backward search yields 34 attack paths under the generated rules. The source code and experimental artifacts are available in an anonymized repository. .

LLM-agent defenses are typically evaluated one session at a time. In deployment, however, attacks can be distributed across independent agents, teams, and runtimes, leaving each local guardrail with only a sparse fragment. We formalize cross-agent asynchronous campaign attribution: linking sessions from the same latent adversarial campaign without shared runtime state, test-time campaign labels, or attacker identity oracles. We introduce Asynchronous Attribution Fingerprint Vectors ($A^2FV$), a lightweight proxy-side reference protocol for scoring pairwise campaign similarity from proxy-observable tool-use, timing, and prompt residue. We also construct SCD-v1, a controlled persona-matched benchmark with benign traffic, isolated attacks, multi-session campaigns, matched non-oracle evasion, and leakage audits. On SCD-v1, $A^2FV$ achieves 0.82 pairwise AUC for campaign linking, while score-only adaptations of per-session detectors and chunked LLM judges remain near chance under the same task. The strongest fixed signal is carried by structural and stylometric residue, while timing is retained as a diagnostic channel for richer proxy traces. Crossed-style controls show that the signal is partly style-sensitive but not reducible to style alone. Static and dimension-aware non-oracle stress tests further show that pairwise separability persists under controlled evasion. These results establish cross-agent campaign attribution as a distinct evaluation layer for securing LLM agents in the wild.

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is an open-source standard that allows AI agents to connect to external tools, databases, and services. While this connectivity enables powerful agent capabilities, it also introduces multi-step attacks that existing per-call defenses cannot reliably detect. Attackers can compose individually benign tool invocations into malicious sequences that evade isolated inspection. This paper presents ChainWatch, a sequential detection framework for identifying multi-step attacks in MCP-based AI agent systems. ChainWatch models attack progression using a six-stage kill chain and applies a Hidden Markov Model (HMM) to classify tool-call sequences. Detection rules are triggered when a session exhibits suspicious progression across multiple stages. The framework is supported by a structured threat model covering direct sequential attacks, indirect prompt injection chains, and hybrid multi-stage attacks. A 20-dimensional feature extraction schema captures behavioral signals from tool interactions. We demonstrate the approach using five representative attack scenarios from the security literature, showing how ChainWatch detects attack chains that evade traditional per-call security mechanisms.

LLM-based agents process external content, exposing them to prompt injection and multi-turn manipulation. Most safety benchmarks evaluate defenders against fixed attack pools collected before evaluation, single-turn or multi-turn. We present a 21-scenario benchmark for \emph{adaptive multi-round attacks against memoryless LLM defenders}: an autonomous LLM attacker observes prior defender responses and pivots across rounds, while each defender response is evaluated as a fresh interaction. Holding the 21 scenarios, attackers, defenders, and structured-output scoring fixed, restricting scoring to the first attacker turn yields $0$-$1\%$ attack success rate (ASR); allowing 15 rounds of adaptive attack yields $5.4$-$14.0\%$. Pooling three frontier attacker LLMs uncovers $1.4$-$2.2\times$ as many unique successful attacks as the best single attacker, and the generated attacks have low cosine similarity ($0.02$-$0.14$) to attacks in existing benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.4 are tied in aggregate ($5.4\%$ each; overlapping $95\%$ CIs), but their weaknesses differ sharply: on one scenario Opus reaches $60\%$ ASR ($95\%$ CI $36$--$80\%$) while GPT-5.4 and Gemini each stay at $7\%$ (CI $1$-$30\%$; the gap is preserved in a higher-$N$ replication). $13$ of $21$ scenarios distinguish at least one defender pair, yet rankings disagree across scenarios (Kendall's $W = 0.19$). We release the benchmark -- 21 evaluation scenarios, 10 public development scenarios, the orchestrator, baseline harnesses, and a multi-attacker CLI -- plus 945 transcripts from the 3$\times$3 frontier matrix, an attack-replay dataset, and 18{,}422 gpt-oss-20b battles from an open competition's final scoring rounds.

This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the results from the Third International Competition on Document Forgery Detection on ID-Cards and Passports, which was held across two distinct tracks. Track 1 evaluates a synthetic-data-based ID-PAD system under controlled but diverse conditions, where the winning team, \textit{Incode}, achieves an $AV_{Rank}$ of 27.82%, confirming consistent performance across metrics and highlighting the importance of a balanced, generalizable design. In Track 2, the challenge intensifies with heterogeneous attack scenarios across different domains, where \textit{Incode} again achieved the top position with an $AV_{Rank}$ of 68.71% across thresholds, outperforming some baselines and established methods. These results demonstrate that PAD effectiveness requires not only high accuracy but also consistency across diverse attack types and imaging conditions. The success of this initiative across both tracks underscores the value of collaboration between companies and academic teams. This year, more than \textit{63 teams} were registered, and more than \textit{100 submission models} were evaluated. This competition has evolved into a leading benchmark state-of-the-art in PAD on ID documents, setting the standard for performance, reproducibility, and real-world applicability in secure identity verification.

With the rapid development of deep learning, its vulnerability has gradually emerged in recent years. This work focuses on backdoor attacks on speech recognition systems. We adopt sounds that are ordinary in nature or in our daily life as triggers for natural backdoor attacks. We conduct experiments on two datasets and three models to validate the performance of natural backdoor attacks and explore the effects of poisoning rate, trigger duration and blend ratio on the performance of natural backdoor attacks. Our results show that natural backdoor attacks have a high attack success rate without compromising model performance on benign samples, even with short or low-amplitude triggers. It requires only 5% of poisoned samples to achieve a near 100% attack success rate. In addition, the backdoor will be automatically activated by the corresponding sound in nature, which is not easy to be detected and will bring severer harm.

Multimodal AI agents increasingly rely on persistent long-term memory to ground generation in past visual and textual episodes. We show that unconditional trust in visual data creates a critical vulnerability. We propose Lucid, a black-box adversarial framework that compromises multimodal memory pipelines under a strictly image-bounded threat model, requiring no access to the target MLLM, target retrieval encoder, or the text channel. Lucid crafts imperceptible perturbations to enable two distinct failure modes based on the availability of historical context: (1) Memory poisoning, an in-context attack where the adversarial image replaces a benign one whose content is reinforced by prior textual context, reliably corrupting visual recall and steering the agent toward attacker-chosen narratives; (2) Memory injection, an out-of-context attack where the adversarial image replaces a benign one in a conversation turn devoid of prior textual grounding, causing the agent to generate attacker-influenced responses with no corrective signal from memory. We evaluate Lucid across various conversation domains and five black-box memory architectures, including graph-structured, LLM-summarized, and commercially deployed systems. Lucid achieves 61.6% ASR on poisoning and 58.4% ASR on injection, exposing a structural vulnerability in multimodal memory pipelines.

Vision-Language Pre-training Models (VLPMs) are known to be vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Recent transferable attacks on VLPMs have followed a common pipeline with complicated loss functions or multi-stage text/image attacks. However, in this paper, we demonstrate that such a sophisticated attack pipeline can be simpler yet more successful. Specifically, we identify three previously overlooked issues caused by inappropriate cross-modal interactions and excessive operations. To address them, we propose the Simple Vision-Language Attack (SimVLA) pipeline, which observably improves transferability and efficiency. Experiments on four datasets and three downstream tasks validate the superiority of our pipeline. For instance, on Flickr30k text-image retrieval dataset, our SimVLA outperforms the SOTA baseline in R@1 transferability by 8.01%-14.71%, while consuming only about 35.73% of the time and 46.26% of the max VRAM. Overall, the superiority of our SimVLA highlights the importance of leveraging domain knowledge (e.g., our proposed cross-modal word identification), while blindly pursuing intricate operations (e.g, complex loss functions and redundant multi-stage designs) may even be harmful. We hope our SimVLA can serve as a simple yet effective backbone for future extensions. Code is available at https://github.com/RYC-98/SimVLA.

The capability of LLM agents to function as the ``brain'' of a system fundamentally expands the scope of analysis beyond a standalone model. Consequently, safety is no longer only about input--output content alignment. It also concerns system behavior and real-world execution outcomes. However, the current literature is fragmented across attack types, applications, and benchmarks. This makes it hard to explain why failures such as prompt injection, tool misuse, and memory poisoning often share the same structural cause, and how they spread through an agent workflow. In this survey, we treat isolation as a first-class principle for LLM-agent system safety. By isolation, we refer to the separation of user inputs, tool access, execution channels, inter-agent communication, and environment-originated context. We organize the literature with a boundary-centric taxonomy of five boundaries: user-agent, agent-tool, agent-execution, agent-agent, and system-environment. This view helps identify where the loss of isolation first occurs, how compromise propagates across boundaries, and which defenses are most relevant at each interface. We also summarize cross-boundary failure paths, discuss open challenges, and outline a research agenda for isolation-by-construction in future agent systems.

Quantum Neural Networks (QNNs) are a promising framework for quantum machine learning on near-term quantum devices, but their security risks remain insufficiently understood. Studies have shown that QNNs are vulnerable to backdoor attacks, yet existing quantum backdoors mostly rely on a fixed trigger shared by all poisoned inputs. This fixed-trigger design is a major weakness because many defenses detect or weaken the repeated patterns such triggers leave in data representations. Although input-aware dynamic backdoors have been studied in classical neural networks, transferring them to QNNs is difficult because quantum learning introduces new obstacles. In particular, measurement compresses the post-ansatz quantum state into a limited classical output, weakening supervision for a trigger generator, while individual density matrices fluctuate with the input and make per-sample contrastive learning unstable. To address these challenges, we propose Q-DIBA, the first input-aware dynamic backdoor attack for QNNs. Q-DIBA jointly trains a classical trigger generator and a victim QNN through a three-mode mini-batch strategy that supports clean behavior, attack activation, and trigger specificity. To provide stable quantum-level supervision, Q-DIBA introduces an ensemble density contrastive loss that operates on post-ansatz quantum states before measurement and contrasts mode-averaged density matrices rather than individual samples. Experiments on MNIST and Fashion-MNIST across multiple QNN architectures show that Q-DIBA achieves high clean accuracy, strong attack success, and high cross-trigger accuracy, demonstrating effectiveness, stealthiness, and input specificity. The attack also remains resilient against defenses including visual inspection, spectral-signature detection, and fine-tuning, suggesting that input-aware quantum backdoors are an important threat to secure QNN deployment.

Safety evaluation of large language models (LLMs) relies largely on single-turn attack datasets and single-judge scoring, underestimating risk from adaptive multi-turn adversaries and reporting a single success rate that does not separate partially actionable outputs from those carrying complete operational detail. We propose AMT-X (Adaptive Multi-Turn Exploitation), a phase-structured multi-turn red-teaming framework. Unlike prior multi-turn attacks that rely on ad hoc escalation or free-form per-goal plans, AMT-X casts the attack as an explicit, reproducible multi-phase state machine driven by semantic signals from the victim, and replaces single-judge scoring with a multi-role jury whose phase-conditioned checklists gate success on actionable harm. Across six frontier victim models (queried under their default safety alignment, without added moderation layers) and seven Moderation sub-categories, AMT-X attains overall attack success rates of 97.6-100% under a lenient score threshold, but 66.7-78.6% under a stricter gate requiring complete, real, and operational detail: a gap of up to 33 percentage points between partially and fully actionable harm.

Internet of Things (IoT) systems are inherently vulnerable due to constrained hardware, outdated firmware, and insecure default configurations, creating a need for scalable and adaptive security testing approaches. While recent adoptions of Large Language Model (LLM) agents have demonstrated promise in penetration testing and Capture-the-Flag (CTF) environments, their application to IoT specific vulnerabilities remains unexplored. This paper presents an autonomous multi-agent framework, referred to as Vulnerability EXploitation using AI Agents (VEXAIoT), for vulnerability discovery and exploitation in IoT environments using LLM-based reasoning and offensive security tools. The framework combines a vulnerability detection agent and an attack execution agent to perform reconnaissance, plan attack sequences, and execute exploits against vulnerable IoT services. The system is evaluated in IoTGoat and Metasploitable environments across ten attack scenarios mapped to OWASP IoT vulnerabilities. Experimental results show attack success rate of up to 100% with low token overhead and average execution times under two minutes for most attacks. Across 260 attack executions, VEXAIoT achieves a 95.0% overall success rate, including 94.5% success in IoTGoat and 96.7% success in Metasploitable2. These results demonstrate the potential for LLM-driven agents to automate IoT vulnerability assessment and offensive security workflows in controlled environments

In the digital era, Portable Document Format (PDF) is one of the most widely used file formats for storing and exchanging digital documents due to its platform independence and rich functionality. However, these same capabilities have also made PDF files an attractive attack vector for cyberattackers, who embed malicious code within seemingly legitimate documents to compromise target systems. This paper presents a novel interpretable Tsetlin Machine (TM)-based framework for PDF malware detection. The proposed framework extracts salient features from PDF documents through static analysis without executing the files and employs rule-based learning to accurately classify benign and malicious PDF documents. Numerical evaluation on the RIT-PDFMal-2026 dataset demonstrates that the proposed framework achieves competitive performance, attaining an accuracy of 98.02% compared with several ML classifiers and existing methods. Moreover, the proposed framework provides intrinsic interpretability by transparently explaining its classification decisions. The combination of competitive detection performance, computational efficiency, and intrinsic interpretability makes the proposed framework a promising solution for practical PDF malware detection.

Open-weight medical language models are increasingly used as the base of patient-facing and clinician-support applications. Their model cards prohibit specific behaviors -- recommending exact drug dosages, issuing definitive diagnoses, prescribing treatments, adjudicating drug-drug interactions, and advising that emergency care can be skipped -- yet a model card describes intended behavior, not robust behavior. We quantify that gap for MedGemma-4B-it under attacks that require no technical sophistication. We build a fully factorial benchmark of 5 guarded-behavior concepts x 50 deterministically templated questions x 6 lay-accessible attack manners x 3 repetitions (4,500 generations), serve the model locally through Ollama under default sampling, and code every response refuse/hedge/comply with three independent judges (an LLM judge, a transparent regex judge, and an NLI-entailment judge). Under the primary LLM judge the overall Attack Success Rate (ASR, the fraction coded comply) is 38.0%. The two framings that reinterpret the request as legitimate dominate: recasting a question as a "medical board exam" item raises ASR from a 29.0% baseline to 53.1% (+24.0 points), and an appeal to an alleged doctor's authority raises it to 43.7% (+14.7); crude instruction-override prefixes have no significant effect. Robustness is dominated by topic: the drug-interaction guardrail is nearly absent (83.2% ASR) while the emergency-deferral guardrail is strong (4.7%) -- and the authority framing is the only attack that breaches it. We report Wilson confidence intervals, cluster-bootstrap effect sizes, a cluster-robust logistic regression, Cochran's Q, per-manner McNemar tests, and inter-judge reliability (Fleiss' kappa = 0.26); absolute ASR is judge-dependent while the ordering of attacks and topics is not. Our findings motivate stronger deployment-time guardrails for open medical models.

Agentic red-teaming benchmarks report whether an injected agent was compromised as a single bit: the attack succeeded, or it did not. We argue that this binary attack-success rate discards the information a defender most needs, namely how harmful the resulting action was. We introduce an action-graded harm rubric that scores an agent's tool-call trajectory on a seven-level ordinal scale (L0 to L6) according to whether the executed action was reversible, whether it crossed scope to reach another party, and whether it expanded privilege. We compute the scale two ways: a deterministic oracle that reads the trajectory and the attacker's stated goal, and a panel of three frontier language-model judges that read a tag-free account of the same trajectory. Across four victim models and two defenses on the AgentDojo workspace suite, severity grading exposes three cases the binary metric hides, including a defense that reports a zero attack-success rate while still permitting an externally visible cross-scope leak through an unfiltered tool. The judge panel reproduces the oracle with high ordinal agreement (Krippendorff's alpha = 0.91) but shares systematic blind spots that we characterize, most notably a failure to recognize escalation chains. Unlike prior work that provides harm taxonomies, harmful-task completion tests, execution-level safety benchmarks, or severity-aware simulation, our contribution is a reusable, trace-grounded severity instrument applied to the actual actions recorded in existing red-team logs. All code, prompts, and per-episode logs are released.

Adversarial vulnerability in deep neural networks (DNNs) has been studied from the perspectives of decision-boundary geometry, feature robustness, input-output Jacobians, and the instability of inverse problems. Here, we focus on the spectral structure of intermediate linear transformations that propagate information through modern DNNs, an unexplored mechanism of adversarial vulnerability. Specifically, we investigate transformer-based vision-language models, whose linear layers admit interpretable spectral decompositions and whose widespread adoption makes understanding their robustness increasingly important. We propose a white-box spectral-subspace-guided attack (SSGRA) that aligns intermediate representations with the subspace spanned by the bottom right singular vectors. Our experiments show improved attack effectiveness over existing baselines. In addition, SSGRA offers a spectral interpretation of adversarial vulnerability in VLMs, providing insights for improving their robustness.

AI agents issue tool calls on the basis of text they cannot verify, so any party who controls part of the context can forge the appearance of authority. I evaluate 15 contemporary language models against eight attack scenarios derived from a published corpus of real agent incidents and find that refusal varies from 100% down to 38% across fully evaluated models; the most expensive model refused only half of the attacks despite a twentyfold price spread. I present aiAuthZ, an authorization gateway that moves the safety decision off the agent's host. Before a tool call executes, the gateway verifies caller identity with a per-message HMAC-SHA256 signature bound to a single-use nonce and a timestamp window, and it evaluates a role-based and argument-level policy that the agent can neither read nor modify. Every decision joins a SHA-256 hash-chained audit log, and each accepted message yields an HMAC-authenticated QR receipt that achieves 94% mean verification across eight transmission channels, with zero forgeries accepted in 25 wrong-key trials. With the gateway in place, residual attack success falls to 0% for all 15 models at no more than 0.03 ms of added decision latency. On the AgentDojo banking suite, aiAuthZ blocks all seven attacker-directed tool calls the evaluated agents emit, at the cost of one legitimate first-time payment, while a spotlighting baseline allows two injections to succeed. Across nine in-scope case studies from the same incident corpus, aiAuthZ blocks nine of nine, against four of nine for a policy baseline without identity binding. The gateway does not prevent a model from being deceived; it prevents a deceived model from acting beyond the verified user's authority on every call routed through it. The implementation and all experiments are released at https://github.com/Sports-Vision-Inc/aiAuthZ.

Retrieval-based image geolocalization has emerged as a powerful technique for determining the location of a query image by matching it against a large, geotagged database. The success of deep learning based approaches has raised concerns regarding privacy and safety. A way to protect users from geolocalization is to design adversarial attacks for such methods. In this paper, we introduce RoadTrip Attack (RTA), a novel and highly effective targeted adversarial attack for geolocalization. RTA conceptualizes the adversarial process as finding an optimal distractor journey to a specific, attacker-chosen location. It employs a beam search algorithm to iteratively construct a sequence of incorrect geographic locations that form a path to the target. At each step, the attack generates subtle perturbations to the query image, guiding the geolocalization model toward the next location in this deceptive path. We show that our method is also strong in black-box settings, obtaining highly transferable attacks with less perceptible image artifacts.

Explainability is central to building trustworthy AI, yet explanation interfaces can inadvertently provide adversaries with an expanded privacy-related attack surfaces. Recent studies show that advanced membership-inference attacks succeed by exploiting confidence-drop trajectories, induced through attribution-guided perturbations, as discriminative features, rather than directly using confidence scores or explanation vectors. Existing defenses against membership inference fail to directly mitigate such explanation-driven attacks. In this work, we investigate whether, during training, a model's own gradients can be leveraged as defense signals against such attacks, thereby aligning explanation profiles between members and non-members. To this end, we propose a Trajectory-Invariant Explanation Regularization (TIER) defense that penalizes erratic fluctuations in confidence drops simulated through gradient-guided perturbations and simultaneously minimizes the distributional shifts via KL-divergence. Unlike conventional adversarial training, which emphasizes label robustness, our approach targets explanation robustness by enforcing self-consistency through KL-divergence and reducing the variance of confidence drops between members and non-members. Extensive experiments confirm that our method effectively mitigates these attacks, delivering privacy protection while maintaining model utility and explanation fidelity.

The evolution toward fully autonomous telecommunications networks (Autonomous Network Levels 4-5) requires AI/ML agents to make real-time network decisions without human intervention. However, no standardized runtime mechanism exists to intercept and validate individual inference outputs before they trigger live network state changes, creating risks of erroneous autonomous decisions. This paper proposes the Guard Rail Validation (GRV) framework, a standardizable runtime architecture for intercepting and validating AI-driven decisions before execution. The framework evaluates decisions across multiple weighted dimensions -- including action scope, action type, service criticality, agent autonomy level, reversibility, and temporal behavioural patterns -- to determine a criticality level. Based on this level, graduated validation mechanisms are applied: execute-with-logging, bounds checking, independent agent validation, or multi-agent consensus. The framework additionally provides cross-agent conflict detection with criticality-weighted priority resolution and runtime conformance logging for regulatory compliance (e.g., EU AI Act Article 14). We present the architecture, algorithmic procedures, O-RAN deployment model, and evaluate threat coverage against known AI/ML attacks in telecommunications.

Presentation Attack Detection (PAD) serves as a crucial safeguard for face recognition systems against presentation attacks such as printed photos, replayed videos, and 3D masks. Despite significant progress, existing PAD models still struggle to generalize across unseen domains due to variations in sensors, lighting, and attack materials. Recent Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have shown strong generalization ability, yet their applications in PAD remain limited because learned prompts, typically optimized under class-label supervision, fail to explicitly align with fine-grained attack-relevant visual semantics. As a result, the learned representations often overfit domain-specific artifacts instead of capturing transferable attack cues. To address this, we propose Concept-Informed Prompts Guided Presentation Attack Detection (CPG-PAD), a framework that introduces model-level concept guidance into the prompt learning process. Specifically, we design a Visual Concept-driven Enhancement (VCE) module that employs eXplainable AI (XAI) techniques to automatically discover PAD-relevant visual concepts and generate concept-associated heatmaps providing localized fine-grained guidance. Guided by these heatmaps, a Prompt-based Concept Injection (PCI) mechanism integrates these concepts into the prompt space through a Visual-Prompt Decoder (VPD) and a concept-mapping loss, enabling prompts to align with the model's internal concept space. This design enables CPG-PAD to capture generalizable and domain-invariant attack cues while effectively suppressing dataset-specific biases. Extensive experiments across nine benchmark datasets demonstrate that CPG-PAD consistently achieves state-of-the-art cross-domain performance under multi-source, limited-source, and single-source settings.

Generative models have recently seen rapid adoption in End-to-End (E2E) autonomous driving (AD), with diffusion-based denoising and vocabulary-based retrieval becoming the dominant trajectory-decoding paradigms. Despite their architectural diversity, current generative AD planners share a common inference pattern: a fixed set of candidate trajectories (anchors, vocabulary entries, or proposal queries) is scored by one or more learned heads conditioned on the Bird's-Eye-View (BEV) features, and the highest-scored candidate is returned as the final trajectory. Under this design, the scoring head is the only barrier between perception and the motion command, and its decision margins between competing candidates are often small. We introduce \textsc{Derail}, an adversarial framework that exploits this scoring-head attack surface. Evaluated on various generative planners, \textsc{Derail} flips the trajectory selection from a safe to an unsafe candidate, with score drops of $39$--$80\%$ and collision rates of up to $50\%$, consistently outperforming generic loss-maximization and feature-divergence attacks. Our analysis suggests that safety-violating objectives govern attack effectiveness against generative AD planners, and that the scoring-head inference pattern itself is a recurring attack surface worth explicit defensive consideration.

Claw-like AI agents (e.g., OpenClaw) are always-on processes with persistent access to credentials, files, tools, and external services. They take on system-level responsibilities -- installing packages, maintaining state, scheduling subtasks, and mediating I/O -- making security failures far more severe than in other agents. Yet existing benchmarks focus on model responses and tool calls, leaving cross-component failure modes largely unmeasured. We adopt a computer-system analogy: treating a Claw-like agent as an agentic computer system whose gateway runtime plays an OS-like mediation role, whose Skills resemble user-installed applications, and whose Plugins resemble loadable extensions with runtime privileges. Each component has a classical counterpart whose protection mechanisms -- refined over decades of cybersecurity research -- are absent on the agent side. From this perspective, we develop SafeClawArena, a benchmark of 406 adversarial tasks across four attack surfaces (Skill Supply-Chain Integrity, Persistent State Exploitation, Cross-Boundary Data Flow, and Indirect Prompt Injection), executed in containerized replicas of real agent platforms with canary-marked credentials and evaluated via automated taint tracking across nine output channels. We evaluate three platforms (OpenClaw, NemoClaw, SeClaw) and five frontier LLMs. The highest attack success rate reaches 70%; malicious Plugins succeed in 100% of cases regardless of the LLM. SeClaw cuts GPT-5.4's attack success rate from 70% to 22%, partly through utility-security tradeoffs rather than active defenses, while Claude-Opus-4.6 already sits near a 22% floor on every platform. These results expose the inadequacy of current defenses and suggest directions for future hardening. Code and data: https://github.com/sunblaze-ucb/SafeClawArena.

Semantic communication (SemCom) aims to preserve semantic meaning and task-oriented information beyond conventional message recovery over wireless channels. The adoption of SemCom in shared-access wireless networks introduces new vulnerabilities for multi-user semantic inference. This paper considers a SemCom system for two transmitters communicating with a common receiver over a multiple access channel. Each transmitter maps source information into latent semantic representations, while the receiver jointly reconstructs and classifies the semantic information for both transmitters. A selective over-the-air backdoor (Trojan) attack is presented in which an adversary transmits a low-power trigger waveform over the air and injects it into the shared received signal during training. By transmitting the trigger again during testing, this stealthy, low-power attack selectively manipulates the semantic inference for one transmitter while minimally affecting the inference of the other transmitter. To mitigate this vulnerability, a trigger-aware defense mechanism is developed to preserve correct semantic labels under trigger-contaminated wireless observations. The results demonstrate both the vulnerability of shared-access SemCom systems to selective over-the-air backdoor attacks and the effectiveness of trigger-aware robust training for semantic protection.

Recent studies have shown that semantic watermarks, which embed information into the initial noise of latent diffusion models (LDMs), are vulnerable to black-box forgery attacks. However, existing methods primarily rely on empirical evidence and lack a rigorous theoretical understanding of the conditions under which such attacks succeed or fail. To bridge this gap, we rethink the nature of such attacks through the lens of rate-distortion in the latent space. Our analysis identifies an irreducible distortion floor due to structural mismatches between proxy and target models, which fundamentally limits the fidelity of forged watermarks. We further characterize this distortion as structured geometric deviations on the latent manifold, in the form of global drift and local deformation rather than stochastic noise. Leveraging these insights, we propose a scheme-agnostic detection method that distinguishes forged samples before watermark verification. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method across diverse black-box scenarios, while preserving robustness to common distortions.

Modern LLM deployments often combine quantization with higher sampling temperatures to reduce cost, latency, or repetition, yet safety evaluations usually treat these as fixed implementation details. We test whether models that are safe at FP16 with greedy decoding remain safe after quantization and stochastic sampling, or whether the two factors amplify each other. We evaluate 8 instruction-tuned models from five families across 3 precisions and 6 temperatures, covering 144 configurations on 7 harmfulness benchmarks and generating about 2.0 million responses, which are scored by a six-judge safety ensemble. Contrary to concerns that low-bit deployment erodes alignment, we find that standard quantization is approximately safety-neutral: for 7 of 8 models, AWQ INT4 keeps attack success within about 1.6 percentage points of FP16 or lowers it, with clear degradation only for SmolLM3-3B (34.5% to 44.1%). However, the larger risk comes from sampling: higher temperatures sharply increase decision instability, with DFR reaching 41.9% at T = 1.0, even when average ASR changes only modestly. The two factors do not compound: our Compound Degradation Index remains sub-additive (-0.071 to +0.018), indicating that quantization partially offsets rather than amplifies temperature-induced degradation. Finally, a per-benchmark breakdown shows that single-benchmark evaluation badly understates risk: several models scoring 0% on AdvBench exceed 80% on ManyHarm. Standard INT4/INT8 quantization can therefore be reasonable for well-aligned models, but safety claims should report multi-sample stability across multiple benchmarks rather than rely on a single benchmark at greedy decoding.

Heterogeneous graph neural networks (HGNNs) have achieved strong performance in modeling complex graph-structured data with multiple node and relation types. However, their robustness under realistic black-box adversarial settings remains insufficiently explored. Existing attacks on HGNNs usually assume access to model gradients, soft prediction scores, or the complete graph structure, which is often unavailable when HGNN-based services are deployed as closed systems. In this paper, we propose Blackknife, a hard-label, query-limited, and structure-limited black-box evasion attack framework for heterogeneous graph neural networks. Blackknife assumes no access to the victim model architecture, parameters, gradients, logits, confidence scores, or the full graph structure. Instead, it only relies on locally observable one-hop heterogeneous structures and a small number of hard-label queries. To generate effective perturbations under these strict constraints, Blackknife first constructs a local relation-aware surrogate model from observable heterogeneous neighborhoods. It then relaxes discrete edge addition and deletion operations into continuous soft weights and optimizes them through projected gradient descent. Finally, the optimized perturbations are discretized into relation-preserving structural rewiring operations and verified using limited hard-label feedback from the victim model. Extensive experiments on three benchmark heterogeneous graph datasets, including ACM, DBLP, and IMDB, demonstrate that Blackknife consistently achieves strong attack success rates against representative HGNN models. The results further show that Blackknife remains effective under topology-based defense strategies, revealing the vulnerability of HGNNs to local structure-limited black-box attacks.

Deep learning, which in general relies on voluminous amounts of training data, is vulnerable to data poisoning attacks, including error-generic attacks and backdoors (Trojans). In this work, we propose a new data poisoning attack we dub a latent class attack. Here, all poisoned examples are from a class that is novel (unknown) for the given classification domain and are mislabeled to one of the known classes (the target class) of the domain, so that the model learns to recognize the novel class as a sub-class of the target class. Such attacks could be used e.g. to defeat AI-based access control systems, or could cause a "foe" to be classified as a "friend". We also propose a post-training defense to detect this attack, without any access to the training set. This detection approach builds on "class subspace orthogonalization" (CSO), a plug-and-play paradigm demonstrated to improve existing backdoor detectors. Here, CSO is used to seek an input (a putative unknown class instance) whose internal representation is not aligned with any of the known classes, and yet which is classified with confidence to one of these classes. Finally, specific to image classification domains, we propose a method for visualizing the estimated unknown class instance, providing explainability to our latent class detections.

Agent-based AI has enabled the automation of tasks by exposing application tools and resources to large language models (LLMs). However, to improve scope and accuracy, agents are often given access rights that exceed those of ordinary users, introducing significant security risks. AI is routinely integrated into applications with a disregard to security, risking data exposure and breaching regulations. This paper applies the AI Trust, Risk, and Security Management (TRiSM) framework to a medical report-generation application to demonstrate how an insecure agent workflow can be transformed into security-conscious agentic workflow. Both workflows were evaluated across five LLMs (Claude Haiku 4.5, GPT-4.1-nano, GPT-4.1-mini, GPT-5.4-mini, and Gemini 2.5 Flash) on two report types, totalling 800 generations and 500 attack scenarios including RAG poisoning, data-field injection, and client-side network injection. The TRiSM-guided agentic workflow reduced mean attack success rates from 31% to 10% for RAG poisoning and from 42% to 25% for data-field injection, while eliminating the network injection vector entirely through server-side prompt construction. Furthermore, report accuracy increased by 14 percentage points (72.5% to 86.5%) with the agentic workflow, demonstrating a secure design which provides more reliable outputs. This paper contributes to knowledge by demonstrating least-privilege, defence in depth agentic workflows improving security and accuracy, while also highlighting model choice is a necessary architectural consideration.

While voice control is rapidly becoming a ubiquitous vector of human-AI communication, the risks facing these systems remain poorly understood. This is, in part, a product of the difficulties in scaling strictly digital adversarial workflows to the physical world. These scale barriers have led the community to abstract away key acoustic factors relating to detectability and the influence of geometry on acoustics. These methodological and metrological shortcomings undermine our understanding of risk. We illuminate these issues through real-world testing, conceptual discussions, and a novel, high-throughput reality simulation framework. By testing over 8 million adversarial evaluations, we demonstrate that acoustic awareness yields relative Word Error Rate increases of up to 94.5% under Whisper and wav2vec. We employ this framework to explore a formalize and operationalize a Dual-Form Signal to Noise Ratio to decouple source stealth from victim attack efficacy, resolving a crucial limitation in current works. This lays the groundwork for repeatable, verifiable research that embraces, rather than abstracts, the acoustic environment.

Adversarial APKs are Android applications modified in the problem space to evade machine-learning malware detectors. In this work, we first show that, despite claims, existing problem-space attacks remain largely impractical. Most techniques leverage software transplantation to inject entire benign modules, introducing many side-effect features and often causing build-time failures. Fine-grained methods that inject only a narrow subset of components exhibit limited effectiveness, while those that also use obfuscation rely on brittle bytecode rewriting, producing APKs that are syntactically valid but semantically unusable. Prior work further overestimates attack success rates by running smoke tests that only validate installation and basic execution, without assessing whether the modified APK still preserves its intended behavior. To overcome these limitations, we present DROIDBREAKER, a practical (build-safe) and functional (semantics-preserving) problem-space attack framework that provides: (i) query-efficient white- and black-box attacks by manipulating only the APK components most influential to the target model; (ii) a set of fine-grained, build-safe manipulations (including injection and obfuscation of API calls, app modules, permissions, and URLs) with minimal side effects; and (iii) a semantics-preserving functionality test that enforces runtime equivalence by comparing execution logs and API-level traces between the initial and the modified APK. Evaluated on a recent corpus of Android applications, DROIDBREAKER achieves high evasion rates with few queries and minimal side effects in both white-box and black-box settings, and drastically reduces detections by commercial malware scanners hosted on VirusTotal.

Semantic search creates an asymmetric disclosure problem: query embeddings may reveal user intent, while returning exact provider vectors distributes reusable representations. We evaluate a deliberately restricted hybrid design. A public corpus-fitted SVD basis and PQ index support client-side candidate selection; candidate IDs are disclosed, while the projected query is encrypted with CKKS. A block-SIMD kernel scores 100 plaintext provider vectors and returns one ciphertext. At 672 dimensions, median server time falls from 1689.1 to 224.5 ms and response size by a factor of 99.5; provider-only saturation reaches 25.99 requests/s with 16 workers. In a frozen post-exploratory revision-analysis subset, disjoint from validation and containing 3,235 canonical BEIR queries, five of six collections satisfy a +/-0.002 nDCG@10 equivalence rule between actual CKKS and plaintext reranking of the same shortlist, while ArguAna is inconclusive. Projection controls favor SVD over random and coordinate truncation. Leakage audits show that disclosed candidate sets are highly linkable and reproduce part of the exact neighbourhood, while public PQ reveals approximate corpus geometry. The design therefore conditionally hides numerical query slots, but does not provide semantic-query, document, unlinkability, circuit, or access-pattern privacy.

Tabular foundation models are commonly assumed to present limited privacy concerns as they are often pre-trained on large collections of synthetic data. However, these models leverage in-context learning, where sensitive records may be provided directly at inference time as labelled context examples. In this paper, we demonstrate that predictions generated via the attention mechanism leak sufficient information to enable effective Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs). To highlight this vulnerability, we propose AMIA (Attention-based Membership Inference Attack), a shadow-model-free attack that exploits the concentration of transformer attention patterns. Our results show that attention mechanisms reveal strong membership signals, which exceed classical confidence-based attacks, achieving an average gain of 7.7%, specially in low false-positive regimes. To mitigate this risk, we introduce an inference-time defence inspired by $k$-anonymity principles. This approach reduces the uniqueness of context-key representations without introducing random noise or retraining the model. By targeting only high-risk queries identified through AMIA scores, the defence substantially reduces membership leakage of this attack by an average of 50% and 25% against confidence-based attacks, while preserving predictive utility with only 3.9% performance degradation. Beyond showing that context examples are vulnerable, we further demonstrate that fine-tuning introduces an additional source of privacy risk. In particular, samples whose prediction confidence increases after fine-tuning become more susceptible to MIAs, indicating that fine-tuning can amplify memorisation and expose sensitive training information through confidence shifts.

Federated learning is vulnerable to backdoor attacks in which malicious clients inject poisoned updates while preserving benign-task performance. In this paper, we study a semantics-driven backdoor mechanism in which attackers use natural visual accessories as triggers and manipulate only the trigger color while keeping the attack pipeline fixed. Our framework considers semantic trigger objects such as masks and sunglasses, instantiated in black and white variants, and evaluates their effect in a controlled federated learning setting. Malicious clients construct poisoned samples by applying a trigger to source-class images and relabeling them to an attacker-chosen target class, while benign clients train only on clean data. We analyze this mechanism under both a standard poisoning objective and a stronger SABLE-based objective that combines clean classification loss, triggered target loss, feature-separation loss in the penultimate representation space, and regularization to keep malicious updates close to the global model. This design enables the attack to remain effective while reducing excessive update drift. Experiments on a four-class CelebA hair-color task show that trigger color significantly changes attack success rate even when trigger semantics, placement, and poisoning budget are unchanged. White triggers are more effective for attacks targeting the blond class, whereas black triggers perform better for attacks targeting the black class. The same trend persists under robust aggregation, showing that trigger color is a meaningful factor in the operation, persistence, and evaluation of semantic backdoor mechanisms in federated learning.

Safety evaluation of large language models (LLMs) is commonly performed by querying models with unsafe or jailbreak prompts and judging whether their outputs violate a safety policy. Although useful, output-level evaluation is expensive, sensitive to judge choice, and easily tied to fixed question banks. We propose SafeVec, a white-box evaluation procedure that measures safety from internal representations rather than generated answers. SafeVec first extracts layer-wise refusal directions from a safety-aligned reference model, then selects stable layer windows where safe and unsafe behaviors are separable, and finally scores a target model by measuring whether its hidden states align with these refusal directions under unsafe and jailbreak prompts. The resulting metric, RAS (Refusal Alignment Score), maps representation-level refusal alignment to a calibrated 0-100 safety score. Across Llama, Gemma, and Qwen model families, RAS separates aligned models from uncensored and abliterated variants, tracks output-level attack success rate, and is substantially faster than judge-based evaluation. These results suggest that refusal alignment provides a compact and efficient signal for white-box LLM safety evaluation.

Although deep Face Swapping (FS) models may benefit the entertainment industry, they pose severe threats to privacy and security. Existing protections, including deepfake detection and adversarial perturbation, are either passive responses or ineffective to unseen subject-agnostic FS models. In this paper, we propose a transferable attack against subject-agnostic FS models named Additive Identity attack based on a Relighting function (AIR). AIR leverages reillumination and additive perturbations to mislead the identity extraction modules in subject-agnostic FS models. By using these two types of perturbations simultaneously, the attack space is extended such that stronger but more visually natural adversarial examples can be identified. To further enhance the visual quality while preserving the effectiveness of the attack, an adaptive translation-invariant operation and an illumination control scheme are designed for AIR. Unlike other methods, AIR does not require a surrogate FS model to achieve high transferability. In addition, a mathematical proof is given for the extension of the attack space. Extensive experiments using 1000 image pairs across various state-of-the-art subject-agnostic FS models, including GAN and diffusion-based FS models, show that AIR surpasses all existing attacks in terms of both attack success rate and image quality.

The accelerated digitalization of renewable energy smart grids through IoT sensors, AMI, and SCADA systems has significantly expanded the attack surface for sophisticated cyberattacks, FDI attacks that stealthily distort state estimation and DoS/DDoS attacks that flood communication channels. Current IDS, however, exhibit three inherent limitations: inadequate modeling of the temporal progression of multi-step attacks, degraded scalability under extremely skewed class distributions of standard benchmark datasets, and restricted generalization across heterogeneous network environments. In this study, we present a Hybrid CNN-LSTM IDS that jointly exploits CNN-based spatial feature extraction and LSTM-based temporal sequence modeling, enabling the detection of instantaneous volumetric anomalies and gradually evolving low and slow-attack campaigns in real time. The model was trained using a seven-step preprocessing workflow comprising missing-value imputation, min-max normalization, one-hot encoding, SMOTE class balancing, mutual-information feature selection, causal temporal sequence construction (T=10), and stratified partitioning. LSTM (96.1%), Random Forest (93.5%), SVM (91.2%) and KNN (89.7%); in NSL-KDD, it reaches 98.2% precision versus 96.4% (LSTM), 95.2% (CNN), 92.7% (Random Forest) and 90.8% (SVM), with margins of 2-9 percentage points in all measures. An ablation analysis identified SMOTE balancing as the most influential design choice (-3.7~pp F1 without it). The model achieves a real-time inference throughput of 27,800 flows/s on GPU and 0.082 ms/sample CPU latency in FP32,, with INT8 quantization providing an additional 3.1 x speedup at 0.3% accuracy loss, confirming deployment feasibility on resource-constrained IEDs with <128MB memory and establishing a deployable deep-learning framework for securing next-generation renewable energy smart grid infrastructure.

Agentic AI systems powered by large language models (LLMs) are rapidly evolving into autonomous decision-making systems, exposing attack vectors beyond those of traditional LLM vulnerabilities. Existing security evaluations are often tied to specific implementations or domains, limiting unified comparison across heterogeneous systems. To address this gap, we introduce RIFT-Bench, a representation-driven methodology for dynamic red-teaming that enables unified evaluations across diverse agentic architectures. Building on a novel hierarchical representation, RIFT-Bench operates in two automated phases: Discovery, which extracts system structure, and Scanning, which executes adaptive adversarial attacks. It directly evaluates the examined system using 105 adaptive adversarial probes spanning diverse attack vectors and objectives. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed evaluation pipeline across 45 agentic systems spanning a diverse range of implementations, showing that the approach generalizes effectively to heterogeneous agentic architectures. Beyond systems and attacks, RIFT-Bench also supports direct evaluation of mitigation strategies. These key capabilities make RIFT-Bench a scalable foundation for security evaluation of agentic AI systems in practice. Infrastructure code and benchmark artifacts are available at https://tinyurl.com/RIFTBench.

Vision-language-action (VLA) models and world-action models (WAM) are the generative models now driving general-purpose robot control, turning raw camera input directly into motor commands. They are increasingly deployed as black-box services, where a partner runs the policy through an interface while the owner keeps the weights private. Training such a model takes proprietary data and heavy computational power, making the deployed model itself a valuable intellectual property. To address this, we propose the \emph{keyed latent-provenance verification} method, which fingerprints the policy through the seed of the Gaussian noise vector that the models draw before generation. At the injection stage, the owner swaps this seed for a keyed one with the same distribution as ordinary noise, so the fingerprinted actions are statistically identical to those of an ordinary run and an adversary watching the output finds no signal to detect or remove. At the verification stage, the owner runs the suspect model under authorized access and records the action channels the robot executes, a partial and possibly post-processed view of the policy's output. From this view, the verifier recovers the seed by gradient-based maximum a posteriori (MAP) optimization, tests it for the secret key to score each rollout, and aggregates these scores into a single decision on whether the suspect model belongs to the owner. We evaluate the method on two representative models across two robot suites. The experiments cover detection of the fingerprint, identification of which of several keys a suspect carries, robustness to a range of attacks, and an analysis of why the design works. Across both models, the fingerprint can be detected reliably with little change to task performance, and it remains detectable under output-side removal attacks and weight-level edits.

Diffusion models (DMs), despite their impressive capabilities across a wide range of generative tasks, have been shown to be vulnerable to backdoor attacks. However, existing backdoor methods face critical trade-offs among key factors: attack performance, stealthiness, time complexity, and required poison rates. For example, achieving high attack performance typically demands a high poison rate and prolonged training, which undermines stealthiness, making the attack more detectable by backdoor defenses. This paper proposes TooBad (trigger optimization for backdoor diffusion models), a backdoor framework which introduces a novel DM-tailored trigger optimization technique to dramatically enhance the performance of backdoor attacks on DMs. Experiments on representative benchmarks such as CIFAR-10 show that TooBad can achieve high ASRs ($> 85$%) at only 0.5% poison rate, significantly lower than the 10% typically required by prior work on the same datasets. At 5% poison rate, TooBad reaches nearly 100% ASR within just 3-5 backdoor injection epochs, whereas existing methods need at least 30-50 epochs at double the poison rate for comparable results. Despite its potency, TooBad easily evades SOTA defenses and maintains high utility. These results reveal a critical threat on DMs and highlight the need for more robust defenses against such stealthy yet efficient attacks.

Self-evolving LLM agent systems, which autonomously update their model parameters, memory, tools, and architectures, introduce a qualitatively new threat landscape in which adversarial influences become permanently encoded, self-amplify across generations, and propagate through populations without sustained attacker access. We present a systematic security and privacy analysis organized around the Module-Lifecycle Attack Surface (MLAS) matrix, which decomposes the attack surface into five functional modules (Brain, Cognitive Resource, Execution, Self-Design, Collective) $\times$ five lifecycle stages (Bootstrap, Propose, Evaluate, Commit, Serve). Analysis of the resulting 25 cells reveals that 17 face critical threats for which no effective partial mitigation. We identify seven cross-cutting amplification effects that interact synergistically and cannot be addressed by securing individual modules in isolation. Comparative case studies of two open-source frameworks demonstrate that evolution-native design activates $3.5\times$ more attack surface cells and achieves a 100% attack persistence rate (40/40 payloads across all CIA+Privacy categories), while co-located security scanners block only 2.5% of attacks. Our findings establish that self-evolution converts every known attack category from session-bounded to lineage-persistent, gives rise to entirely new attack classes, and renders static defenses structurally inadequate, motivating evolution-aware security frameworks and formal verification for self-modifying systems.

Modern Large Language Models (LLMs) rely on extensive safety alignment, yet the mechanistic basis of refusal remains opaque. In this work, we investigate whether safety compliance is a deep semantic decision or a manipulable linear feature. We introduce Contrastive Logit Steering (CLS), a zero-optimization framework that isolates the "refusal direction" by contrasting hidden states derived from safe and unrestricted system prompts. Unlike representation engineering methods that intervene on internal activations, CLS operates directly on the output distribution, serving as a diagnostic probe for alignment fragility. When coupled with prefix injection to bypass initial refusal reflexes, this method induces a phase transition where guardrails collapse. Our experiments on 7 model families reveal that safety implementation is architecturally deterministic. While models like Llama-3.1 exhibit a "Late Decision" topology that is easily bypassed by CLS (reaching 95% ASR in approximately one second), others like Qwen-2.5 demonstrate "Early Divergence" by integrating safety mid-computation. Direct comparison with established activation-level steering methods shows that CLS achieves substantially higher attack success rates on Llama 2 (73% vs. 22.6%) and Qwen 7B (91% vs. 79.2%), demonstrating that logit-level intervention exposes alignment vulnerabilities that hidden-state methods underestimate. Beyond attacks, we show that this linearity enables bidirectional control: inverting the steering vector "hardens" models against jailbreaks without retraining. Our findings suggest that current alignment techniques create a steerable "safety axis" that serves as both a critical vulnerability and a precise primitive for defense.

Agentic AI systems increasingly rely on language-model components to interpret instructions, process external data, invoke tools, and coordinate with other agents. These capabilities make prompt-injection and jailbreak attacks more consequential, especially as attackers adopt model-guided automation to scale probing, prompt refinement, and response evaluation. This work analyzes the resulting attack-defense setting through a probabilistic model of a target system, its defense mechanism, and the attacker's automated judge. Our analysis shows that conventional detect-and-block defenses can allow attacker success rate (ASR) to approach one as the query budget grows, since predictable refusals provide useful feedback to automated search. We then examine detect-and-misdirect, where detected malicious interactions receive controlled, non-operational responses designed to induce false-positive errors in the attacker's judge. This strategy reduces the positive predictive value of attacker-selected candidates and yields a bounded asymptotic ASR. We evaluate a proof-of-concept realization of this strategy through Contextual Misdirection via Progressive Engagement (CMPE), a lightweight conversational misdirection method designed to replace predictable refusal text with safe but strategically misleading responses in automated jailbreak settings. On jailbreak benchmarks, CMPE reduces estimated ASR upper bounds by up to two orders of magnitude and nearly eliminates verified attack success in end-to-end PAIR and GPTFuzz attack runs.

Multi-stage cyberattacks span system, network, and browser logs. Detecting them requires correlating events across all three sources. Machine learning methods can learn these cross-source patterns, but they need labeled multi-source data. Existing public datasets fall short. Network-only datasets such as CICIDS and UNSW-NB15 miss host and browser activity. Host-focused datasets such as LMDG and CICAPT-IIoT lack browser telemetry. ATLAS includes all three sources but labels events only as malicious or benign, without MITRE Adversarial Tactics, Techniques, and Common Knowledge (ATT&CK) technique granularity. No public dataset combines all three sources with per-entry ATT&CK technique labels. We close the gap by building a multi-source log dataset of 870 sessions (70 attack, 800 benign) and approximately 2.3 million events. We captured system, network, and browser activity simultaneously on Windows endpoints. We labeled malicious events with ATT&CK technique IDs, covering 12 tactics and 53 techniques. We generated all attack data using real tools, including Remote Access Trojan (RAT), Command and Control (C2) tunnels, and cloud exfiltration. To demonstrate learnability, we fine-tuned three Small Language Models (SLMs) (Qwen2.5-1.5B, Llama-3.2-3B, Phi-4-Mini) using Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA). We compared each against its base variant across ten metrics on two tasks: chunk classification and ATT&CK technique identification. Fine-tuning improved every model on every metric. Chunk classification accuracy rose from approximately 8% in the base variants to between 90% and 97% after fine-tuning. Technique identification remained challenging, with the best exact-match accuracy at 42%, although high partial-match scores show the models captured most of the underlying reasoning.

Multi-threat robustness remains a fundamental challenge in deep learning. Although joint adversarial training (JAT) is widely adopted, it suffers from negative transfer under heterogeneous threats, particularly between $\ell_p$-bounded and semantic attacks. Through first-order gradient analysis, we formalize this as gradient incompatibility and theoretically establish the necessity of decoupled optimization. We further reveal that these conflicting threats exhibit separable spectral characteristics in the frequency domain. Motivated by this observation, we propose Threat-aware Frequency Decoupling (TaFD), a two-stage defense framework that reformulates JAT as a frequency-domain divide-and-conquer paradigm. TaFD first discovers latent threat domains via unsupervised clustering of attack spectral prototypes and trains a lightweight classifier for inference-time threat domain identification. Conditioned on the prediction, TaFD employs a Frequency-Conditional Convolution that learns threat-domain-specific spectral masks and routes each sample to the corresponding expert, enforcing structural parameter separation and alleviating optimization conflicts. We validate TaFD on three representative image-classification benchmarks (CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and Tiny-ImageNet) and on two representative architectures (the convolutional ResNet and the hybrid-transformer MobileViT). Extensive results demonstrate that TaFD achieves more balanced robustness against heterogeneous attacks than existing JAT and frequency-domain baselines, improving average robust accuracy by approximately 11% over the strongest baseline while maintaining leading clean accuracy.

Large language model (LLM)-based search agents synthesize open-web content into actionable recommendations on behalf of users, creating a risk that attacker-published pages are transformed into endorsed claims. We introduce SearchGEO, a controlled evaluation framework for measuring endorsement corruption in LLM-based web-search agents, combining a web-evidence manipulation pipeline, a five-mode attack taxonomy, and multiple output-level metrics. We evaluate 13 LLM backends on 308 cases each. Results show that vulnerability patterns vary across backends: overall attack success rate (ASR) ranges from 0.0% on Claude-Sonnet-4.6 to 31.4% on Gemini-3-Flash, the strongest attack mode differs by model family, and the same deployment scaffold could amplify or decrease ASR on different backends. An auxiliary agent-skill probe, where endorsement becomes an install command, exposes a sharp split among otherwise robust backends: Claude over-rejects while GPT over-trusts. These findings argue for treating recommendation reliability under adversarial search content as a first-class dimension of backend safety evaluation.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in user-facing systems, black-box jailbreak defense has become an important practical problem. Existing defenses often rely on known-attack coverage, prompt-level semantic judgment, or local runtime control, yet these paths can become unstable under evolving prompt packaging, expression rewriting, and structure manipulation. We observe that many black-box jailbreaks do not remove the harmful goal, but reorganize the information needed to express and execute it, thereby evading safety alignment while remaining recoverable during generation. Motivated by this observation, we propose DoubtProbe, a dual-branch inference-time defense framework that combines structural verification with semantic auditing and formulates black-box jailbreak defense as consistency checking under controlled transformation. The structural branch extracts a structured representation from the original request, reconstructs the request under representation constraints, and detects information-preservation failures between the original and reconstructed requests; the semantic branch audits the original prompt directly. We evaluate DoubtProbe against representative black-box defenses on jailbreak and benign-request benchmarks, and further test backbone transfer from Qwen2.5-72B to Llama-3.1-70B. Results show that DoubtProbe achieves a stronger and more stable defense-utility trade-off: on Qwen2.5-72B, it reduces the JBB attack success rate from 0.293 to 0.100 and the CodeAttack attack success rate from 0.152 to 0.001, while maintaining false positive rates of 0.022 and 0.016 on AlpacaEval and OR-Bench; the same pattern remains stable on Llama-3.1-70B. These findings show that structural inconsistency signals provide a practical and generalizable basis for black-box jailbreak defense, especially when combined with semantic auditing.

Agents increasingly access large language models (LLMs) through API routers. A router terminates the client's transport-layer security session and opens a separate upstream session, so it holds the full interaction in plaintext. This makes the router an application-layer man-in-the-middle: it can rewrite agent tool calls, swap dependencies for typosquatted packages, trigger attacks only under audit-evading conditions, and passively exfiltrate secrets. Existing client-side defenses are evadable. We propose AEGIS, a provider-transparent attested API router whose data path is a client-verified faithful passthrough. AEGISconfines plaintext handling to a small hardware-enclave component while leaving authentication, scheduling, accounting, and management on the untrusted host. The client verifies the enclave before releasing plaintext. The host can neither read nor alter the interaction, and plaintext leaves only toward destinations fixed by the measured image. We show that all four malicious-router attack classes succeed against a plaintext-access baseline and are blocked by AEGIS, including adaptive tests against the same boundary. The trusted path is $851$ lines, carries three provider-native APIs without conversion, and completes every request under real-provider workload and concurrency. In a seeded audit pilot, two commodity coding agents find eight and ten of ten planted invariant violations. The local relay overhead is about six milliseconds per request.

Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on long-term memory to support complex task execution, user personalization, and domain adaptation. Meanwhile, emerging access-control mechanisms for LLM agents are being explored to block policy-violating requests and prevent misuse. We reveal a novel attack surface arising from agent memory operations: prohibited content that would trigger access control can be fragmented across interactions, stored in long-term memory in benign-appearing form, and later reconstructed through memory retrieval without appearing explicitly in the final user query. We propose FragFuse, the first attack that enables unprivileged users to bypass agent access control by exploiting this temporal channel introduced by long-term memory. FragFuse operates in three stages: (1) identifying rejection-responsive fragments via black-box adaptive querying with fragment masking; (2) injecting these fragments into memory using marker carrier queries; and (3) retrieving and fusing the stored fragments through a follow-up attack query. Although FragFuse can be instantiated manually for individual agents, we further develop a surrogate-based optimization scheme that tunes fusion instructions and marker designs, enabling automated attack generation without violating the attacker's threat-model assumptions. We evaluate FragFuse across four representative agent settings and task domains, covering three state-of-the-art agent access-control mechanisms. FragFuse achieves an average bypass success rate of 86.3% and an average end-to-end harmful task success rate of 41.1% across all settings, with only 4.4% average task-success degradation compared with configurations without access control. We also show that alternative defenses, including state-of-the-art prompt-injection detectors and perplexity detectors, do not effectively address this attack.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly used as automated judges, e.g., for image quality and safety assessment. However, their adversarial robustness remains largely unexplored, threatening the fairness and reliability of automated judging. To bridge this gap, we introduce RobustMLLMJudge, the first general framework for evaluating the adversarial robustness of general-purpose MLLMs when functioning as judges. It covers diverse attacks against popular judge approaches across quality and safety evaluation scenarios. Using RobustMLLMJudge, we reveal that i) different MLLM judges are highly vulnerable to score-inflating adversarial attacks; and ii) although effective, these attack methods face a critical challenge due to unique constraints in the evaluation protocols of MLLM judges. We further propose MGSIA, namely Manifold-Guided Semantic Induction Attack, a novel method that bypasses these constraints to enable more effective and transferable attacks on MLLM judges. The core idea of MGSIA is to combine affirmative semantic induction with high-score manifold alignment: it maximizes the probability that judges yield affirmative responses (e.g., "Yes") to binary semantic queries, while regularizing adversarial representations toward high-score centers estimated from proxy protocols. Together, these objectives yield transferable score-inflating perturbations. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superiority and generalizability of MGSIA in deceiving advanced MLLM judges under different evaluation scenarios, highlighting the need for robust MLLM judges. Code and data will be made available at https://github.com/mala-lab/RobustMLLMJudge.