Search: “safety-processing”

HazardAuditor: From Executable Threats to Safer Computer-Use Agents

HazardAuditor trains execution-grounded guard models for computer-use agents, improving safety verdict accuracy by up to 16.5 points.

HazardAuditor runs heterogeneous agents (Claude Code, Codex, Hermes, OpenClaw) in controlled environments and normalizes their interactions into a canonical event representation for cross-framework supervision. It introduces Guard Policy Optimization (GuardPO), which converts deterministic safety outcomes into sequence-level advantages and normalizes rationale and verdict regions so the safety decision becomes the effective optimization unit. Across multiple benchmarks and heterogeneous computer-use systems, HazardAuditor improves accuracy by up to 16.5 percentage points over the strongest prior guard model. Code, models, and evaluation artifacts are being released.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 13, 20:00 UTC · 3d agoAI safety & security

Safety for Whom? Boundary-Aware Self-Distillation for Controlled LLM Safety Refusal

A self-distillation safety framework tunes narrow-boundary refusals in Qwen3-8B, raising target-domain refusal to 84.75% while cutting over-refusal from 15.20% to 5.20%.

The paper formulates narrow-boundary safety, where deployments need refusals within specific topics rather than whole subjects, and proposes an offline self-generated framework with controlled topic generation, escalating retries, and harmful-benign boundary pairs. On political persuasion with Qwen3-8B, the method raised target-domain refusal from 9.47% to 84.75% and cut the mean unsafe-response rate across three broader benchmarks from 26.26% to 0.14%. Verified target-model responses reduced over-refusal from 15.20% to 5.20%, and boundary-pair data cut comply-side over-refusal on held-out pairs from 32.94% to 4.16%. Results show data composition controls the safety-usability trade-off and alignment should be evaluated on both sides of the refusal boundary.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 2, 20:00 UTC · 14d agoAI safety & security1

OpenAI previews privacy-focused system for detecting AI misuse

OpenAI previews Private Safety Processing, detecting cross-interaction AI misuse without exposing customer prompt content, rolling out in September.

OpenAI previewed Private Safety Processing for API and enterprise customers, a system that analyzes patterns across related interactions to flag potential misuse while restricting OpenAI personnel from accessing underlying content. It builds on Zero Data Retention (ZDR) deployments, keeping content on customer-controlled infrastructure or a planned option using customer-controlled encryption keys, with prompts and responses not retained after processing. A technical white paper and rollout are planned for September; images flagged as potential CSAM are the retention exception.

Help Net Security·Aug 20, 00:00 UTC · 27d agoAI safety & security

Perturbation Probing: A New Diagnostic for the Fragility of LLM Safety

Unit 42 research shows LLM safety refusals concentrate in a thin neural layer, motivating external, multi-layered AI security controls.

Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 introduces Perturbation Probing, a diagnostic technique for measuring the fragility of LLM safety mechanisms. The research finds that safety refusal behavior is localized within a thin neural layer, implying small perturbations can undermine built-in refusals. The authors argue this motivates external, multi-layered security defenses on top of model-internal safety training.

Palo Alto Unit 42·Aug 28, 22:00 UTC · 18d agoAI safety & security

MIT creates method to force AI to comply with safety rules

MIT researchers published HardFlow, a method enforcing hard safety constraints on flow-matching generative models' final outputs without retraining.

MIT researchers led by Zeyang Li and Navid Azizan developed HardFlow, a trajectory-optimization method that enforces strict, non-negotiable constraints on flow-matching generative models by checking rule satisfaction only at the final generation step. Published in IEEE TPAMI, it outperformed six rival projection and guidance methods on four simulated benchmarks including D3IL robotic manipulation, Maze2D, physical process control, and image editing. All results are simulation-only, with no independent reproduction yet reported.

Hacker News · security·Sep 14, 16:18 UTC · 2d agoAI researchHN 24↑ · 25 comments

Quantifying IIoT Sensor Node Criticality by Fusing its Data Criticality and Security Vulnerability

Researchers propose a Dempster–Shafer framework fusing IIoT sensor data criticality with CVSS 4.0/3.1 vulnerability scores to rank node criticality.

The paper introduces a framework that evaluates Industrial IoT sensor node criticality by fusing data criticality and cybersecurity vulnerability scores using Dempster–Shafer (D-S) theory. It was validated on a dataset from red wine production and is claimed to generalize to other industrial settings with minimal modification. Results show criticality rankings derived from CVSS 4.0 scores differ significantly from those derived from CVSS 3.1, underscoring how vulnerability scoring methodology affects security prioritization.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 9, 07:03 UTC · 7d agoResearch

Building a risk-based vulnerability management program that scales

Asimily CEO Shankar Somasundaram outlines a risk-based vulnerability management approach using inventory, attack paths, KEV and EPSS data.

In a Help Net Security video, Asimily CEO Shankar Somasundaram argues patching everything is infeasible as AI-driven attacks inflate vulnerability counts, with one customer finding a thousand unknowns for each known one. He recommends building a full inventory of devices, applications, and data flows, mapping attack paths for reachability, and prioritizing with KEV, EPSS, and business impact. Mitigations include patching, virtual patching via NACs and firewalls, segmentation, and configuration snapshots to detect drift.

Help Net Security·Aug 24, 04:21 UTC · 23d agoIndustry

SEMA-GUARD: Semantic and Graph-Based Vulnerability Detection in Assembly Code

SEMA-GUARD uses semantic analysis and graph neural networks to detect vulnerabilities in assembly code, achieving 85.1% accuracy on a Juliet-derived benchmark.

SEMA-GUARD is a framework that detects vulnerabilities in compiled programs when source code is unavailable, targeting malware, firmware, and embedded systems analysis. It enriches control flow graphs with low-level execution semantics including stack manipulations, memory accesses, and data flow. Evaluated on a Juliet Test Suite set compiled to assembly and split into function-level chunks, it achieves 85.1% accuracy and an F1 score of 0.801, outperforming purely statistical or structural approaches.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 15, 14:35 UTC · 1d agoResearch1

Safe Meta-Reinforcement Learning via Information Space Reachability

Safe meta-RL framework reasons about safety in information space, learning a safety value function used for safety filtering and constrained policy optimization.

The paper proposes safe meta-RL that reasons about safety in information space, capturing both physical state and the agent's belief over the underlying task. A safety value function measures the probability of avoiding unsafe regions indefinitely and satisfies a self-consistency condition and Bellman equation, making it learnable via meta-RL. The resulting algorithm uses the learned function for safety filtering and constrained policy optimization, with effectiveness demonstrated on meta-RL benchmarks.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 14, 17:27 UTC · 2d agoAI research

One in four MCP servers opens AI agent security to code execution risk

Noma Security whitepaper finds most popular AI Skills and many MCP servers carry high-risk capabilities, with state changes most prevalent.

Noma Security analyzed hundreds of popular MCP servers and Skills across eight risk categories, finding most widely used Skills carry at least one risky characteristic and a typical enterprise runs well over a hundred high-risk agent tools, with arbitrary code execution common across MCP servers. The most prevalent risk is the ability to change state or data, and named toxic combinations include ContextCrush data leakage, ForcedLeak via poisoned Salesforce CRM records, DockerDash supply-chain compromise, the Replit production database deletion, and the hijacked Amazon Q VS Code extension. Building on OWASP LLM06:2025, the paper proposes the No Excessive CAP framework of capabilities, autonomy, and permissions, recommending allowlisting, MCP version pinning, approval gates on irreversible actions, and user-scoped expiring credentials.

Help Net Security·Aug 24, 04:21 UTC · 23d agoAI safety & security

Your Critical Vulnerabilities Might Not Be Your Biggest Risk

Autonomous penetration testing advocates prioritize exploitable attack paths over raw vulnerability severity for continuous security validation.

The article argues that scanner severity scores lack context: a critical flaw behind strong segmentation may be low priority, while a medium flaw on internet-facing systems can provide a foothold chained toward sensitive data. It positions autonomous penetration testing and attack path validation as the execution layer for continuous security validation, replacing point-in-time assessments. The piece is vendor-authored thought leadership rather than incident or vulnerability news.

The Hacker News·Sep 11, 11:30 UTC · 5d agoIndustry1

TIER: Threat Implicitness Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Safety Behaviors

TIER benchmark shows LLM safety behaviors shift gradually across threat implicitness levels, with jailbreaks exposing the largest robustness gaps.

The TIER benchmark evaluates LLM safety behaviors across four risk domains and four threat levels, from explicit harmful requests to sophisticated jailbreaks, using a six-label behavior scale and two independent LLM judges. Experiments on six open-weight LLMs show safety behaviors evolve gradually across threat levels rather than flipping from refusal to compliance. Models with similar Attack Success Rates can exhibit distinct response distributions, arguing for behavior-aware safety evaluation.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 4, 13:13 UTC · 12d agoAI safety & security

More than half of AI

CyberScoop·Aug 7, 17:10 UTC · Aug 7, 2026Exploit / PoC

An Empirical Analysis of ReDoS Vulnerabilities and ReDoS Detection Tools

Study of NVD data finds ReDoS vulnerabilities growing more prevalent and more likely to be exploited, while five detection tools disagree substantially.

The study compares five publicly available ReDoS detection tools and one regex correction tool across three datasets. An empirical analysis of all ReDoS vulnerabilities reported to the NVD finds they are becoming more prevalent and are much more likely to be exploited than non-ReDoS weaknesses. The detection tools exhibited substantial disagreement on whether a given regex is vulnerable.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 9, 15:09 UTC · 7d agoResearch

An Empirical Security Analysis of Open-Source Software Used in Onboard Satellite Systems

Study of 126 onboard satellite OSS repositories finds 2,827 security findings, 72% medium severity or higher, dominated by memory safety and code quality weaknesses.

Researchers performed an empirical security analysis of 126 public repositories of open-source software used in onboard satellite systems using SBOM generation, software composition analysis, static application security testing, infrastructure-as-code analysis, and secret scanning. After cleaning and deduplication the pipeline produced 2,827 findings, with medium-severity findings accounting for 49% and 72% classified medium or higher. A CWE-based taxonomy mapped all findings to eight weakness families, with Memory Safety and Code Quality dominating, followed by Input Validation and Injection. Project-developed code accounted for 81.4% of findings, though external dependency code remained relevant; findings do not establish mission-specific exploitability.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 14, 11:54 UTC · 2d agoResearch1

What Breaks Under Pruning in Smart Homes, and When? Evaluating LLM Degradation Across Architectures and Task Complexity

Pruning study across four LLM architectures finds dense models degrade sharply on smart-home tool calling while MoE models tolerate far more.

Researchers systematically study pruning-induced degradation in smart-home tool calling across four LLMs spanning dense Transformer, dense hybrid, and mixture-of-experts architectures, combining depth, width, hybrid, and expert pruning methods, and evaluate over 19,500 instances from three datasets after post-pruning supervised fine-tuning. Dense models show narrow safe pruning regions followed by sharp degradation, while MoE models tolerate substantially more pruning. Pruning degrades grounded specificity (operation, device, argument, value) before schema-level intent, and aggressive dense pruning can induce systematic over-refusal.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 15, 17:51 UTC · 1d agoAI research

Edge Case launches Guardian, an AI platform for tracking risk across autonomous systems

Edge Case launched Guardian, an AI platform creating a Digital Safety Twin to continuously track risk across autonomous and defense systems.

Edge Case launched Guardian, an AI-driven platform that fuses safety analysis, engineering data, and operational signals into a continuous Digital Safety Twin. It targets advanced autonomous platforms in commercial and defense markets, with six customer agreements signed at launch. The platform tracks hazards, mitigations, and source-linked evidence across the development lifecycle, shifting safety from one-time review to continuous capability.

Help Net Security·Sep 2, 00:00 UTC · 14d agoAI tools & infra

What researchers learned about building an LLM security workflow

Oslo and FFI researchers show structured agentic workflows lift LLM alert-triage accuracy from 0% to about 93% on malicious cases.

Researchers at the University of Oslo and the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment tested GPT-5-mini, Claude 3 Haiku, Qwen3:30B, and Gemma 3:27B on alerts from the AIT Log Data Set V1.1; given only alert descriptions and log summaries, all four models correctly flagged zero percent of true-positive cases involving reconnaissance, brute-force logins, and initial access. Wrapping the same models in a workflow with constrained SQL queries over Suricata logs, an evidence summarizer, and a verdict stage with revision loops raised malicious-case accuracy to an average of 93 percent, with GPT-5-mini identifying every malicious case across 100 runs. The authors flag it as a proof-of-concept on one synthetic scenario and note models skewed conservative on benign alerts, with GPT-5-mini marking every benign case uncertain.

Help Net Security·Aug 24, 04:21 UTC · 23d agoAI research1

AI-Driven Threat Intelligence for Gulf Enterprises: Why Detection Speed Is Now a Regulatory Requirement

Cyble argues GCC regulators' 6-72 hour breach-notification deadlines make AI-powered detection essential for Gulf enterprises.

Cyble's blog highlights that the UAE Information Assurance Standard v2 requires incident notification within 6 hours of detection, while Saudi Arabia's SAMA cybersecurity framework and NCA Essential Cybersecurity Controls converge on 72-hour reporting. It argues that compliance clocks start at detection, not response, and that IAS v2 mandates 24/7 monitoring with defined SLAs for Tier 1 critical infrastructure entities. The piece promotes Cyble Vision's AI-powered threat intelligence for continuous exposure monitoring and audit-ready detection logs.

Cyble·Sep 4, 13:23 UTC · 12d agoIndustry

Refuse without Refusal: A Structural Analysis of Safety-Tuning Responses for Reducing False Refusals in Language Models

Study shows training LLMs on refusal rationales instead of boilerplate refusal statements reduces false refusals while maintaining safety performance.

The paper decomposes safety-tuning responses into a boilerplate refusal statement and an explanatory rationale, finding that refusal statements push models to rely on superficial cues and misjudge benign queries as harmful. Training solely on rationales reduces false refusals while maintaining comparable safety performance, and the benefits carry over to in-context learning configurations and remain compatible with inference-time mitigations. The results argue for precisely curated, fine-grained safety supervision datasets when aligning LLMs.

Hugging Face daily papers·Sep 3, 20:00 UTC · 13d agoAI safety & security1

Retrofitting Code Using LLMs to Support Exceptional Behavior

EXCODER combines static/dynamic analysis with LLMs to retrofit exception-handling code, achieving 85.92% pass@1 with Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B on Java benchmarks.

The paper introduces the task of retrofitting existing code with Exception Related Code (throw statements, guarding conditions, try/catch blocks) so that given Exceptional Behavior Tests pass. EXCODER performs context engineering by integrating static and dynamic program analysis output with LLMs; it was evaluated on a benchmark built from 304 methods across 75 GitHub Java projects. Combined with Qwen 2.5 Coder 32B, EXCODER achieves pass@1, 5, and 10 rates of 85.92%, 86.18%, and 86.51%, roughly 13 percentage points over baseline, and manual inspection reveals remaining limitations.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CL·Sep 9, 16:18 UTC · 7d agoAI research1

When the prompt becomes the payload: A practical pen-testing guide for GenAI, LLM and RAG applications

CSO Online publishes a practical penetration-testing guide for GenAI, LLM, and RAG applications, covering prompt injection, retrieval poisoning, and tenant isolation testing.

The guide frames LLM applications as attack graphs spanning prompts, retrieval layers, vector stores, tools, identities, and downstream APIs, arguing that conventional web testing misses instruction-vs-data channel risks. It builds on OWASP prompt injection guidance (direct vs. indirect injection) and NIST's 2025 adversarial machine-learning taxonomy, noting that RAG and fine-tuning do not remove injection risk. Recommended practices include documenting trust transitions across components, using canaries and synthetic records to avoid test side effects, running multi-turn and obfuscated injection campaigns, and verifying chains from poisoned documents to observable state changes. It also details testing RAG pipelines via controlled document poisoning across metadata, OCR layers, and code comments, plus cross-tenant isolation checks on retrieved document IDs.

CSO Online·Sep 9, 10:00 UTC · 7d agoAI safety & security1

Big Tech’s AI safety rift signals disruption and disparity for enterprises

Diverging AI safety stances among major labs will make frontier model access less predictable, pushing enterprises toward routing layers and independent validation.

A public rift among leading AI labs over safety approaches - Meta's Zuckerberg backing neutral evaluators, Dario Amodei urging a slower pace, and Sam Altman calling for collaboration on standards - is creating operational challenges for enterprise IT. Analysts from Gartner and others say divergent vendor release schedules, access tiers, and regional restrictions will make frontier model access less predictable, effectively treating frontier AI as a managed supply with pricing premiums. Recommendations include routing layers between applications and providers, contractual deprecation terms, and independent validation of models before production use.

CSO Online·16:19 UTC · 4h agoAI industry

An Empirical Analysis of CodeQL False Positives and Query Refinements for Java Vulnerabilities

Study of 167 Java CVE instances finds CodeQL false positives follow recurring patterns; query refinements remove 81.8% of reviewed ones.

Researchers ran CodeQL's Java security query suite on 167 CVE instances from 110 projects, manually reviewing 500 sampled false-positive paths and building a five-category taxonomy led by Missed Path Constraint or Sanitization (36.6%), Benign Execution Context (29.4%), and Missing Trust Boundary Modeling (27.6%). Guided by the taxonomy, query-level refinements removed 81.8% of reviewed false positives and 15.8% of reported paths across the selected queries while retaining 7 of 8 true positives. To address generalization, agentic coding tools given the refinement patterns as templates adapted them to new projects successfully in 56% and 62% of tasks, versus 28% without guidance.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 3, 22:48 UTC · 12d agoResearch1

Redtail Payload Analysis [Guest Diary], (Wed, Sep 9th)

SANS guest analyst detonated a RedTail Linux sample from a DShield honeypot, finding process masquerading as php-fpm, monitoring-kill behavior, and a TCP listener.

A DShield honeypot captured multi-architecture RedTail Linux executables (ARM, ARM64, i686, RISC-V, x86-64) deployed via shell scripts. Dynamic analysis of the UPX-packed, statically linked x86-64 sample (SHA-256 63be5f38...d35e) in an isolated Ubuntu 24.04 VM on Proxmox showed it renamed its process via prctl(PR_SET_NAME), killed a filesystem-monitoring process, and opened a TCP listening socket while surviving processes posed as php-fpm or PostgreSQL-like workers. Differential memory images pre- and post-execution were captured from the hypervisor for forensics.

SANS Internet Storm Center·Sep 10, 12:58 UTC · 6d agoMalware in the wild1

A Graph-Based Approach for Mapping Kernel-Level Telemetry to MITRE ATT&CK

Trace2ATT&CK maps eBPF kernel telemetry to MITRE ATT&CK via provenance graphs and RAG with local open-weights LLMs, validated on 347 Atomic Red Team tests.

Trace2ATT&CK collects kernel-level events via eBPF, correlates attacker commands into a provenance graph, and derives compact graph representations suitable for LLM-based reasoning, mapping behavior to MITRE ATT&CK techniques with ranked candidates and rationales. Mapping uses both pure LLM prompting and retrieval-augmented generation grounded in the ATT&CK knowledge base. It was evaluated on 347 Linux Atomic Red Team tests using locally deployed open-weights LLMs. RAG consistently improved ATT&CK mapping over pure prompting, and provenance graphs substantially outperformed raw telemetry, without compromising data confidentiality.

arXiv cs.CR·Sep 11, 13:35 UTC · 5d agoResearch

RapidFort Runtime brings continuous CVE monitoring and tamper detection

Help Net Security·Aug 4, 00:00 UTC · Aug 4, 2026Vulnerability

Offering Zero Data Retention for frontier models

OpenAI reaffirms Zero Data Retention for eligible API customers and previews Private Safety Processing that runs safety checks without retaining data.

OpenAI reaffirmed its Zero Data Retention offering for eligible API customers on frontier models and previewed Private Safety Processing, which enables advanced AI safety monitoring and checks without compromising customer data privacy. The announcement targets enterprises with strict data retention and compliance requirements.

OpenAI News·Aug 19, 19:00 UTC · 28d agoAI industry

The safety penalty: Reclaiming operational sovereignty in the age of AI

Cisco Talos argues restrictive frontier AI models impose a 'safety penalty' on security teams, urging operational sovereignty for defensive AI in incident response.

Cisco Talos published commentary arguing that increasingly restrictive frontier AI models create a 'safety penalty' that slows real-time incident response. It recommends organizations pursue operational sovereignty so defensive AI can keep pace with unconstrained adversaries.

Cisco Talos·Aug 25, 10:00 UTC · 22d agoIndustry

Harnessing LLMs for Automating BOLA Detection

Unit 42's BOLABuster methodology uses LLMs to automate detection of broken object-level authorization vulnerabilities, uncovering flaws in Grafana, Harbor, and Easy!Appointments.

Palo Alto Unit 42 details BOLABuster, a methodology combining large language models with heuristics to automate detection of broken object-level authorization (BOLA) flaws, which traditional fuzzing and static analysis struggle to find. The approach uses LLM reasoning to understand application logic, map endpoint dependency relationships, and generate and interpret test cases. It found CVE-2024-1313 in Grafana, CVE-2024-22278 in Harbor, and 15 CVEs in Easy!Appointments. The team is continuing to hunt for BOLAs in open-source and internal projects.

Palo Alto Unit 42·Aug 17, 12:34 UTC · Aug 17, 2026ResearchCVE-2024-1313CVE-2024-22278CVE-2023-3285+14 CVEs