Frontier AI developers are relying on layers of safeguards to protect against catastrophic misuse of AI systems. Anthropic guards their latest Claude 4 Opus model using one such defense pipeline, and other frontier developers including Google DeepMind and OpenAI pledge to soon deploy similar defenses. However, the security of such pipelines is unclear, with limited prior work evaluating or attacking these pipelines. We address this gap by developing and red-teaming an open-source defense pipeline. 1 First, we find that a novel few-shot-prompted input and output classifier outperforms state-of-the-art open-weight safeguard model ShieldGemma across three attacks and two datasets, reducing the attack success rate (ASR) to 0% on the catastrophic misuse dataset ClearHarm. Second, we introduce a STaged AttaCK (STACK) procedure that achieves 71% ASR on ClearHarm in a black-box attack against the few-shot-prompted classifier pipeline. Finally, we also evaluate STACK in a transfer setting, achieving 33% ASR, providing initial evidence that it is feasible to design attacks with no access to the target pipeline. We conclude by suggesting specific mitigations that developers could use to thwart staged attacks.

The robustness of LLMs to jailbreak attacks, where users design prompts to circumvent safety measures and misuse model capabilities, has been studied primarily for LLMs acting as simple chatbots. Meanwhile, LLM agents---which use external tools and can execute multi-stage tasks---may pose a greater risk if misused, but their robustness remains underexplored. To facilitate research on LLM agent misuse, we propose a new benchmark called AgentHarm. The benchmark includes a diverse set of 110 explicitly malicious agent tasks (440 with augmentations), covering 11 harm categories including fraud, cybercrime, and harassment. In addition to measuring whether models refuse harmful agentic requests, scoring well on AgentHarm requires jailbroken agents to maintain their capabilities following an attack to complete a multi-step task. We evaluate a range of leading LLMs, and find (1) leading LLMs are surprisingly complaint with malicious agent requests without jailbreaking, (2) simple universal jailbreak strings can be adapted to effectively jailbreak agents, and (3) these jailbreaks enable coherent and malicious multi-step agent behavior and retain model capabilities. To enable simple and reliable evaluation of attacks and defenses for LLM-based agents, we publicly release AgentHarm at https://huggingface.co/datasets/ai-safety-institute/AgentHarm.

LLM developers deploy technical mitigations to prevent _fine-tuning misuse attacks_, attacks in which adversaries evade safeguards by fine-tuning the model using a public API. Previous work has established several successful attacks against specific fine-tuning API defences; however, prior attacks training and/or inference samples can be easily flagged as suspicious. In this work, we show that defences of fine-tuning APIs that seek to detect individual harmful training or inference samples ('pointwise' detection) are _fundamentally limited_ in their ability to prevent fine-tuning attacks. We demonstrate a class of 'pointwise-undetectable' attacks that repurpose semantic or syntactic variations in benign model outputs to covertly transmit dangerous knowledge. Our attacks are composed solely of unsuspicious benign samples that can be collected from the model before fine-tuning, meaning training and inference samples are all individually benign and low-perplexity. We test our attacks against the OpenAI fine-tuning API, finding they succeed in eliciting answers to harmful multiple-choice questions, and that they evade an enhanced monitoring system we design that successfully detects other fine-tuning attacks. Our results showing fundamental limitations of defending against pointwise attacks suggest focusing research efforts on mitigations towards multi-point defences.

Existing benchmarks for evaluating the security risks and capabilities (e.g., vulnerability detection) of code-generating large language models (LLMs) face several key limitations:(1) limited coverage of risk and capabilities;(2) reliance on static evaluation metrics such as LLM judgments or rule-based detection, which lack the precision of dynamic analysis; and(3) a trade-off between data quality and benchmark scale.To address these challenges, we introduce a general and scalable benchmark construction framework that begins with manually validated, high-quality seed examples and expands them via targeted mutations.Each mutated sample retains the seed’s security semantics while providing diverse, unseen instances. The resulting benchmark bundles every artifact required for dynamic evaluation, including prompts, vulnerable and patched code, test cases, and ground-truth proofs of concept, enabling rigorous measurement of insecure coding, vulnerability detection, and patch generation. Applying this framework to Python, C/C++, and Java, we build SECODEPLT, a dataset of more than 5.9k samples spanning 44 CWE-based risk categories and three security capabilities. Compared with state-of-the-art benchmarks, SECODEPLT offers broader coverage, higher data fidelity, and substantially greater scale. We use SECODEPLT to evaluate leading code-generation LLMs and agents, revealing their strengths and weaknesses in both generating secure code and identifying or fixing vulnerabilities.We provide our code in \url{https://github.com/ucsb-mlsec/SeCodePLT}, data in \url{https://huggingface.co/datasets/UCSB-SURFI/SeCodePLT}

AI agents are rapidly being deployed across diverse industries, but can they adhere to deployment policies under attacks? We organized a one-month red teaming challenge---the largest of its kind to date---involving expert red teamers attempting to elicit policy violations from AI agents powered by $22$ frontier LLMs. Our challenge collected $1.8$ million prompt injection attacks, resulting in over $60,000$ documented successful policy violations, revealing critical vulnerabilities. Utilizing this extensive data, we construct a challenging AI agent red teaming benchmark, currently achieving near $100\%$ attack success rates across all tested agents and associated policies. Our further analysis reveals high transferability and universality of successful attacks, underscoring the scale and criticality of existing AI agent vulnerabilities. We also observe minimal correlation between agent robustness and factors such as model capability, size, or inference compute budget, highlighting the necessity of substantial improvements in defense. We hope our benchmark and insights drive further research toward more secure and reliable AI agents.