Attack Context

Coding agents Research

Security issues affecting repository-aware and tool-using coding agents

11 matching entries out of 16 in this category

Coding agents research results

11 entries

Agentic Binary Reverse-Engineering Capability Gaps

Published Aug 11, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

SRE-Bench evaluates whether cybersecurity agents can recover the behavior of realistic binary-only software without relying on source-code memorization. The authors construct 19 private programs, 44 anti-analysis primitives, 262 binary instances, and 1,572 deterministic grading tasks covering security-relevant reverse-engineering scenarios.

The Next Challenge for Agentic Cybersecurity: A Realistic, Contamination-Free Reverse Engineering Benchmark

Evaluated models: GPT-5.6 Sol, Claude-Opus-5, GPT-5.5+2 more

GPT-5.6 Sol
Claude-Opus-5
GPT-5.5
Grok 4.5
GLM 5.2

Trajectory Poisoning in Self-Evolving Agent Skills

Published Aug 6, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

Self-evolving agent-skill systems may promote recurring, attacker-controlled execution records into persistent reusable instructions. The paper evaluates whether poisoned but task-plausible trajectories survive aggregation and appear in generated skill artifacts, using inert canary behaviors and two structurally different skill-evolution pipelines.

When Experience Becomes Instruction: Trajectory Poisoning in Self-Evolving Agent Skill Systems

Evaluated models: GPT-5.4, MiniMax M2.5, DeepSeek V3.2+3 more

GPT-5.4
MiniMax M2.5
DeepSeek V3.2
DeepSeek V4-Pro
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
Qwen3.5-122B-A10B

Dynamic Security Testing for Third-Party Agent Skills

Published Aug 4, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

SkillSentry evaluates third-party agent skills by constructing source-grounded decoy environments and comparing matched executions with and without the tested skill. The method requires completed, observable, skill-attributed side effects rather than treating suspicious text, ordinary privileged operations, or unexecuted paths as proven malicious behavior.

SkillSentry: Adaptive Honey Worlds for Dynamic Safety Testing of Agent Skills

Evaluated models: DeepSeek V4-Pro

Repository-Level Coding Agent Vulnerability Detection Gaps

Published Aug 3, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

VulnGym measures whether coding agents can locate and explain repository-level security vulnerabilities from realistic advisory and source-code context. The benchmark contains 184 reviewed advisories, 408 line-annotated vulnerability entries, and 23 repositories, with separate end-to-end detection and oracle-conditioned localization tasks.

VulnGym: Benchmarking Coding Agents for Repository-Level Vulnerability Detection

Evaluated models: DeepSeek V4 Flash, GLM 5.2, MiniMax-M3+4 more

DeepSeek V4 Flash
GLM 5.2
MiniMax-M3
Qwen3.5-2B
Qwen3.5-4B
Qwen3.5-9B
Qwen3.5-27B

Persistent Agent Memory Poisoning and Incomplete Repair

Published Jul 29, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

MemSecBench follows malicious agent-memory content from initial write through persistence, retrieval, action selection, execution, and attempted selective repair. Its controlled Write–Execute–Forget protocol evaluates 310 human-reviewed cases across two harnesses, four memory backends, three model backends, and seven evidence-gated lifecycle checkpoints.

MemSecBench: Tracking Agent Memory Poisoning from Persistence to Consequence and Repair

Evaluated models: GPT-5.5, DeepSeek V4-Pro, MiniMax-M3

Workspace Agent Runtime Safety Failures Across Risk Carriers

Published Jul 29, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

AgentS4D measures unsafe actions and state changes across complete workspace-agent executions rather than treating task completion or isolated model responses as safety evidence. Its 328 sandboxed cases introduce risky content through user requests, documents, web resources, tools, third-party skills, and persistent memory, then compare the same cases across four agent harnesses and five model backends.

AgentS4D: Benchmarking Runtime Risks across the Execution Lifecycle of LLM-Based Workspace Agents

Evaluated models: GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.1 Pro, DeepSeek V4-Pro+2 more

GPT-5.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro
DeepSeek V4-Pro
MiniMax-M3
Qwen3.7-Plus

Malicious GitHub Issue Injection Against Coding Agents

Published Jul 22, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

IssueTrojanBench studies indirect prompt injection when a coding agent processes an apparently ordinary software-development issue or related artifact. Starting with six legitimate seed issues from two Python repositories, the authors construct 696 adversarial issue variants spanning four unsafe-action families and six delivery formats, then execute those variants across six agent-model configurations.

IssueTrojanBench: Benchmarking AI Coding Agents Against Malicious Issue Requests

Evaluated models: GPT-5.3 Codex, GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.6

Third-Party Agent Skill Supply-Chain Execution Risks

Published Jul 22, 2026Analyzed Aug 13, 2026Source: arXiv

OpenSkillRisk evaluates whether agent harnesses safely handle third-party skills that introduce risky behavior through otherwise plausible, benign tasks. The benchmark assembles 263 risky skills from public agent-skill ecosystems and tests three CLI-agent harnesses against seven risk categories using isolated task workspaces, mocked external services, and execution-level evidence.

OpenSkillRisk: Benchmarking Agent Safety When Using Real-World Risky Third-Party Skills

Evaluated models: GPT-5.1 Codex Mini, GPT-5.3 Codex, GPT-5.4+10 more

GPT-5.1 Codex Mini
GPT-5.3 Codex
GPT-5.4
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 3 Flash
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6
DeepSeek V3.2
DeepSeek V4-Pro
Kimi-K2.6
GLM-5.1

Prompt injection across agent privilege boundaries

Published Jul 21, 2026Analyzed Sep 9, 2026Source: arXiv

Untrusted issue descriptions and tool responses can redirect privileged coding and tool agents. Twin Agent separates exploration from execution and restricts the information exchanged between them.

Twin Agent: Context Residual Compression for Privilege Separated Agents

Evaluated models: GPT-5.2, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Gemini 3.5 Flash

Unsafe shell commands can pass LLM agent dispatch guards

Published Jul 21, 2026Analyzed Sep 9, 2026Source: arXiv

Shell-command screening can miss harmful actions generated by coding agents. CARE combines static checks with optional model review at the command-dispatch boundary.

CARE: Pre-Execution Command Verification for Shell-Executing LLM Agents

Evaluated models: Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct, Granite Guardian 2B, Llama Guard 3 8B+1 more

Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
Granite Guardian 2B
Llama Guard 3 8B
GPT-oss Safeguard 20B

Related research categories