arXiv:2605.09684cs.CRcs.AI2026-05被引 2

用半自动化红队测试暴露编码代理监控的隐藏漏洞,提升评估真实性。

MonitoringBench: Semi-Automated Red-Teaming for Agent Monitoring

论文配图:MonitoringBench: Semi-Automated Red-Teaming for Agent Monitoring
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 构建攻击分解流程,解决大模型生成与执行能力不匹配问题。
  • 生成2644条攻击轨迹,使顶尖监控器捕获率从94.9%降至60.3%。
  • 提供可复用方法,适配持续进化的代理与监控系统评估。

我们提出一种红队测试方法,揭示当前编码代理监控中难以发现的攻击,表明现有实践可能低估攻击难度并高估监控性能。识别出三大挑战:第一,攻击生成中的模式坍缩,通过新型攻击分类体系提升覆盖广度;第二,构思与执行之间的断层——前沿大模型能提出强攻击构想或执行,但无法同步完成,我们通过策略生成、执行与事后轨迹优化三步分解缓解;第三,人工诱发成本过高,我们设计半自动化红队流水线。应用于支持工具使用的编码代理场景BashArena,该流水线构建了MonitoringBench基准,包含2644条攻击轨迹,用于评估监控能力与失效模式。相比仅靠人工诱发的攻击,本方法生成的攻击更多样更强:Opus-4.5监控器在原始攻击上捕获率达94.9%,在最优优化攻击下降至60.3%,多个中等水平监控器下降更显著。针对三个开发监控器优化的攻击可泛化至十个预留监控器,捕获率普遍随监控能力提升而上升。使用该基准,我们发现前沿监控器常能检测异常行为,却易被说服或未能合理校准可疑度评分,提示明确改进路径。MonitoringBench既为当前工具使用监控器提供静态评估基准,也提供可迭代更新的评估方法论。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

We introduce a red-teaming methodology that exposes harder-to-catch attacks for coding-agent monitors, suggesting that current practices may under-elicit attacks and overstate monitor performance. We identify three challenges with current red-teaming. First, mode collapse in attack generation, which we reduce with a novel attack taxonomy for broader coverage. Second, a conceive-execute gap: frontier LLMs can propose strong attack ideas or execute them, but not all at once. We mitigate this by decomposing attack construction into strategy generation, execution, and post-hoc trajectory refinement. Third, manual elicitation is costly to scale, which we address with our semi-automated red-teaming pipeline. Applied to BashArena, an AI control setting for tool-using coding agents, this pipeline produces MonitoringBench, a benchmark of 2,644 attack trajectories for evaluating monitor capabilities and failure modes. Our pipeline produces more diverse and stronger attacks: Opus-4.5 monitor's catch rate falls from 94.9\% on elicited-only Opus attacks to 60.3\% on our best refined attacks, with larger drops for several mid-tier monitors. Attacks optimized against three development monitors generalize to ten held-out monitors, with catch rates generally increasing with monitor capability. Using this benchmark, we provide a snapshot of the current monitor capabilities and find that frontier monitors often detect suspicious actions but fall for persuasion or fail to calibrate suspiciousness scores appropriately, suggesting tractable paths for improvement. MonitoringBench provides both a static benchmark for current tool-use monitors and a reusable methodology for refreshing these evaluations as agents and monitors improve.

红队测试监控评估代码代理基准测试

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。