AutoPenBench: Benchmarking Generative Agents for Penetration Testing

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.03225v2
• Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 17:05:27 GMT
• Title: AutoPenBench: Benchmarking Generative Agents for Penetration Testing
• Authors: Luca Gioacchini, Marco Mellia, Idilio Drago, Alexander Delsanto, Giuseppe Siracusano, Roberto Bifulco,
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces AutoPenBench, an open benchmark for evaluating generative agents in automated penetration testing. We present a comprehensive framework that includes 33 tasks, each representing a vulnerable system that the agent has to attack. We show the benefits of AutoPenBench by testing two agent architectures: a fully autonomous and a semi-autonomous supporting human interaction.
• Score: 42.681170697805726
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Generative AI agents, software systems powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), are emerging as a promising approach to automate cybersecurity tasks. Among the others, penetration testing is a challenging field due to the task complexity and the diverse strategies to simulate cyber-attacks. Despite growing interest and initial studies in automating penetration testing with generative agents, there remains a significant gap in the form of a comprehensive and standard framework for their evaluation and development. This paper introduces AutoPenBench, an open benchmark for evaluating generative agents in automated penetration testing. We present a comprehensive framework that includes 33 tasks, each representing a vulnerable system that the agent has to attack. Tasks are of increasing difficulty levels, including in-vitro and real-world scenarios. We assess the agent performance with generic and specific milestones that allow us to compare results in a standardised manner and understand the limits of the agent under test. We show the benefits of AutoPenBench by testing two agent architectures: a fully autonomous and a semi-autonomous supporting human interaction. We compare their performance and limitations. For example, the fully autonomous agent performs unsatisfactorily achieving a 21% Success Rate (SR) across the benchmark, solving 27% of the simple tasks and only one real-world task. In contrast, the assisted agent demonstrates substantial improvements, with 64% of SR. AutoPenBench allows us also to observe how different LLMs like GPT-4o or OpenAI o1 impact the ability of the agents to complete the tasks. We believe that our benchmark fills the gap with a standard and flexible framework to compare penetration testing agents on a common ground. We hope to extend AutoPenBench along with the research community by making it available under https://github.com/lucagioacchini/auto-pen-bench.

Related papers

• AutoPT: How Far Are We from the End2End Automated Web Penetration Testing? [54.65079443902714]
  We introduce AutoPT, an automated penetration testing agent based on the principle of PSM driven by LLMs. Our results show that AutoPT outperforms the baseline framework ReAct on the GPT-4o mini model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-02T13:24:30Z)
• SPA-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for SmartPhone Agent Evaluation [89.24729958546168]
  We present SPA-Bench, a comprehensive SmartPhone Agent Benchmark designed to evaluate (M)LLM-based agents. SPA-Bench offers three key contributions: A diverse set of tasks covering system and third-party apps in both English and Chinese, focusing on features commonly used in daily routines. A novel evaluation pipeline that automatically assesses agent performance across multiple dimensions, encompassing seven metrics related to task completion and resource consumption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-19T17:28:48Z)
• Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents [61.33974108405561]
  We introduce the Agent-as-a-Judge framework, wherein agentic systems are used to evaluate agentic systems. This is an organic extension of the LLM-as-a-Judge framework, incorporating agentic features that enable intermediate feedback for the entire task-solving process. We present DevAI, a new benchmark of 55 realistic automated AI development tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:57:02Z)
• Assessing the Performance of Human-Capable LLMs -- Are LLMs Coming for Your Job? [0.0]
  SelfScore is a benchmark designed to assess the performance of automated Large Language Model (LLM) agents on help desk and professional consultation tasks. The benchmark evaluates agents on problem complexity and response helpfulness, ensuring transparency and simplicity in its scoring system. The study raises concerns about the potential displacement of human workers, especially in areas where AI technologies excel.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T14:37:35Z)
• CRAB: Cross-environment Agent Benchmark for Multimodal Language Model Agents [49.68117560675367]
  Crab is the first benchmark framework designed to support cross-environment tasks. Our framework supports multiple devices and can be easily extended to any environment with a Python interface. The experimental results demonstrate that the single agent with GPT-4o achieves the best completion ratio of 38.01%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-01T17:55:04Z)
• A Preliminary Study on Using Large Language Models in Software Pentesting [2.0551676463612636]
  Large language models (LLM) are perceived to offer promising potentials for automating security tasks. We investigate the use of LLMs in software pentesting, where the main task is to automatically identify software security vulnerabilities in source code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-30T21:42:59Z)
• AutoAct: Automatic Agent Learning from Scratch for QA via Self-Planning [54.47116888545878]
  AutoAct is an automatic agent learning framework for QA. It does not rely on large-scale annotated data and synthetic planning trajectories from closed-source models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-10T16:57:24Z)
• Agents for Automated User Experience Testing [4.6453787256723365]
  We propose an agent based approach for automatic UX testing. We develop agents with basic problem solving skills and a core affect model. Although this research is still at a primordial state, we believe the results here make a strong case for the use of intelligent agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-13T14:13:28Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.