arXiv AI
Evaluating System One Models for Agent Security Decisions: Reliability, Calibration, and Selective Automation
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Aug 28
Beyond F1: Evaluating Coverage and Failure Recovery in AI Model Security Scanners
The paper evaluates three AI model security scanners—ModelScan, ModelAudit, and Fickling—using a benchmark of 170 Pickle and PyTorch artifacts from 145 families, 135 of which have binary security labels. It distinguishes coverage metrics such as non‑N/A coverage, analysis completion, and definitive security decisions, finding that ModelAudit achieved 100% definitive decisions, Fickling 81.5%, and ModelScan 49.6%. When a definitive judgment was made, ModelScan reached perfect precision, recall, and F1, while Fickling added no unique true positives beyond those found by the other tools.
arXiv AI
Jun 19
Analyzing Defensive Misdirection Against Model-Guided Automated Attacks on Agentic AI Systems
arXiv:2606. 20470v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic AI systems increasingly rely on language-model components to interpret instructions, process external data, invoke tools, and coordinate with other agents.
arXiv AI
Aug 3
Tool Specifications Matter: Uncovering and Mitigating Safety Risks in AI Agents
arXiv:2607. 29254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents extend large language models (LLMs) with external tools, enabling them to perform complex tasks and translate model outputs into consequential real-world actions.
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 31
SkillSafetyBench: Evaluating Agent Safety under Skill-Facing Attack Surfaces
arXiv:2605.12015v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reusable skills are becoming a common interface for extending large language model agents, packaging procedural guidance with access to files...
arXiv AI
Sep 25
Calibrated Decision Models for Autonomous Penetration-Testing Harnesses: JEV and Laya as System One Decision Layers for LLM-Driven Pentest Agents
The paper proposes using lightweight, calibrated System One decision models—specifically JEV and Laya—to improve autonomous penetration-testing harnesses that rely on large language models (LLMs). It defines four key decision points (finding adjudication, severity recalibration, agent pruning, and confirmation loops) and presents a NeuroSploit case study showing differences in severity distribution, runtime, and grading when using TypeSafe System One. The authors review existing System One specifications, discuss various RL-based training approaches, and introduce Rave, a domain‑adapted model with a proposed training and evaluation framework.
arXiv AI
Jun 18
SafeClawBench: Separating Semantic, Audit-Evidence, and Sandbox Harm in Tool-Using LLM Agents
arXiv:2606. 18356v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using language-model agents introduce security failures that go beyond unsafe text: they can disclose protected objects, write persistent memory, send messages, modify databases, or trigger harmful code and tool effects.