Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Aaron Grattafiori

dblp:355/2111 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Network and information security
1 paper
Security and privacy of machine learning · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Language models and text generation · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Security and privacy of machine learning
adversarial attack
0.912025
Automated Red Teaming with GOAT: the Generative Offensive Agent Tester · ICML 2025
Security and privacy of machine learning › red teaming
automated red teaming
0.912025
Automated Red Teaming with GOAT: the Generative Offensive Agent Tester · ICML 2025
Security and privacy of machine learning › adversarial attack › jailbreak attack
multi-turn jailbreak
0.912025
Automated Red Teaming with GOAT: the Generative Offensive Agent Tester · ICML 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model safety
0.312025
Automated Red Teaming with GOAT: the Generative Offensive Agent Tester · ICML 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

large language model · 1.7agentic prompting · 1.7adversarial prompting techniques · 1.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Automated Red Teaming with GOAT: the Generative Offensive Agent Tester
abstract
Red teaming aims to assess how large language models (LLMs) can produce content that violates norms, policies, and rules set forth during their safety training. However, most existing automated methods in literature are not representative of the way common users exploit the multi-turn conversational nature of AI models. While manual testing addresses this gap, it is an inefficient and often expensive process. To address these limitations, we introduce the Generative Offensive Agent Tester (GOAT), an automated agentic red teaming system that simulates plain language adversarial conversations while leveraging multiple adversarial prompting techniques to identify vuLnerabilities in LLMs. We instantiate GOAT with 7 red teaming attacks by prompting a general purpose model in a way that encourages reasoning through the choices of methods available, the current target model’s response, and the next steps. Our approach is designed to be extensible and efficient, allowing human testers to focus on exploring new areas of risk while automation covers the scaled adversarial stress-testing of known risk territory. We present the design and evaluation of GOAT, demonstrating its effectiveness in identifying vulnerabilities in state-of-the-art LLMs, with an ASR@10 of 96% against smaller models such as Llama 3.1 8B, and 91% against Llama 3.1 70B and 94% for GPT-4o when evaluated against larger models on the JailbreakBench dataset.
Maya Pavlova, Erik Brinkman, Krithika Iyer, Vitor Albiero, Joanna Bitton, Hailey Nguyen, Cristian Canton, Ivan Evtimov, Aaron Grattafiori
ICML9
2025 WASP: Benchmarking Web Agent Security Against Prompt Injection Attacks
abstract
Autonomous UI agents powered by AI have tremendous potential to boost human productivity by automating routine tasks such as filing taxes and paying bills. However, a major challenge in unlocking their full potential is security, which is exacerbated by the agent's ability to take action on their user's behalf. Existing tests for prompt injections in web agents either over-simplify the threat by testing unrealistic scenarios or giving the attacker too much power, or look at single-step isolated tasks. To more accurately measure progress for secure web agents, we introduce WASP – a new publicly available benchmark for end-to-end evaluation of Web Agent Security against Prompt Injection attacks. Evaluating with WASP shows that even top-tier AI models, including those with advanced reasoning capabilities, can be deceived by simple, low-effort human-written injections in very realistic scenarios. Our end-to-end evaluation reveals a previously unobserved insight: while attacks partially succeed in up to 86% of the case, even state-of-the-art agents often struggle to fully complete the attacker goals – highlighting the current state of security by incompetence. Code and data are available at https://github.com/facebookresearch/wasp.
Ivan Evtimov, Arman Zharmagambetov, Aaron Grattafiori, Chuan Guo 0001, Kamalika Chaudhuri
NeurIPS3