SpatialTrust: A Benchmark for Environmental Risk Recognition in Secure Authentication

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.29489v1
• Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2026 00:37:58 GMT
• Title: SpatialTrust: A Benchmark for Environmental Risk Recognition in Secure Authentication
• Abstract summary: We present SpatialTrust, a benchmark for evaluating environmental risk recognition in secure authentication.<n>We find that current models show limited performance, especially in understanding and explaining indirect risks.<n>Our findings highlight the need for dedicated benchmarks and structured inference methods to improve the trustworthiness of MLLMs in secure authentication.
• Score: 23.71302562556758
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Visual environmental risk recognition plays an important role in secure authentication, where a user's surroundings may reveal sensitive information or introduce potential security risks. However, existing evaluations of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) rarely examine whether models can reliably recognize, localize, and explain such risks in spatially grounded authentication scenarios. We present SpatialTrust, a question-answering benchmark for evaluating environmental risk recognition in secure authentication. SpatialTrust assesses five complementary abilities: sensitive factor detection, direct factor identification, indirect factor identification, direct factor explanation, and indirect factor explanation. We evaluate both proprietary and open-source MLLMs and find that current models show limited performance, especially in understanding and explaining indirect risks, indicating that spatial risk awareness remains a challenging capability for MLLMs. In addition, we introduce SpatialTrustGuard, a structured QA-and-audit pipeline that improves Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct from 36.78% to 41.12% overall. Our findings highlight the need for dedicated benchmarks and structured inference methods to improve the trustworthiness of MLLMs in secure authentication.

Related papers

• Large Language Models in Misinformation Ecosystems: Misuse, Defense, and Vulnerability [65.56750741053266]
  Large language models (LLMs) have transformed misinformation from a content-centric problem into a broader ecosystem-level security challenge.<n>In this paper, we introduce a role-layer framework to unify these risks and defenses.<n>The role characterizes LLMs as attackers, defenders, and vulnerable components of verification systems, while the layer dimension covers content, social contexts, evidence environments, and verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-11T17:04:17Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models for Trustworthiness Assessment of Web Applications [13.909850314037653]
  This study presents an empirical methodology to automate the trustworthiness assessment of web applications by leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We propose an extension of a hierarchical Quality Model (QM) based on the Logic Score of Preference (LSP)<n> Experimental results indicate that excessive structural context can introduce noise, whereas rule-based instructional prompting improves assessment reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-24T23:33:54Z)
• Towards Verifiably Safe Tool Use for LLM Agents [53.55621104327779]
  Large language model (LLM)-based AI agents extend capabilities by enabling access to tools such as data sources, APIs, search engines, code sandboxes, and even other agents.<n>LLMs may invoke unintended tool interactions and introduce risks, such as leaking sensitive data or overwriting critical records.<n>Current approaches to mitigate these risks, such as model-based safeguards, enhance agents' reliability but cannot guarantee system safety.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-12T21:31:38Z)
• SafeRBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Safety Assessment in Large Reasoning Models [60.8821834954637]
  We present SafeRBench, the first benchmark that assesses LRM safety end-to-end.<n>We pioneer the incorporation of risk categories and levels into input design.<n>We introduce a micro-thought chunking mechanism to segment long reasoning traces into semantically coherent units.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-19T06:46:33Z)
• MENTOR: A Metacognition-Driven Self-Evolution Framework for Uncovering and Mitigating Implicit Risks in LLMs on Domain Tasks [17.598413159363393]
  Current alignment efforts primarily target explicit risks such as bias, hate speech, and violence.<n>We propose MENTOR: A MEtacognition-driveN self-evoluTion framework for uncOvering and mitigating implicit risks in large language models.<n>We release a supporting dataset of 9,000 risk queries spanning education, finance, and management to enhance domain-specific risk identification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T13:51:51Z)
• DeepKnown-Guard: A Proprietary Model-Based Safety Response Framework for AI Agents [12.054307827384415]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become increasingly prominent, severely constraining their trustworthy deployment in critical domains.<n>This paper proposes a novel safety response framework designed to safeguard LLMs at both the input and output levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-05T03:04:35Z)
• RADAR: A Risk-Aware Dynamic Multi-Agent Framework for LLM Safety Evaluation via Role-Specialized Collaboration [81.38705556267917]
  Existing safety evaluation methods for large language models (LLMs) suffer from inherent limitations.<n>We introduce a theoretical framework that reconstructs the underlying risk concept space.<n>We propose RADAR, a multi-agent collaborative evaluation framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-28T09:35:32Z)
• A Context-Aware Dual-Metric Framework for Confidence Estimation in Large Language Models [6.62851757612838]
  Current confidence estimation methods for large language models (LLMs) neglect the relevance between responses and contextual information.<n>We propose CRUX, which integrates context faithfulness and consistency for confidence estimation via two novel metrics.<n> Experiments across three benchmark datasets demonstrate CRUX's effectiveness, achieving the highest AUROC than existing baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T12:58:34Z)
• REVAL: A Comprehension Evaluation on Reliability and Values of Large Vision-Language Models [59.445672459851274]
  REVAL is a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate the textbfREliability and textbfVALue of Large Vision-Language Models.<n>REVAL encompasses over 144K image-text Visual Question Answering (VQA) samples, structured into two primary sections: Reliability and Values.<n>We evaluate 26 models, including mainstream open-source LVLMs and prominent closed-source models like GPT-4o and Gemini-1.5-Pro.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T07:54:35Z)
• Towards Fully Exploiting LLM Internal States to Enhance Knowledge Boundary Perception [58.62352010928591]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit impressive performance across diverse tasks but often struggle to accurately gauge their knowledge boundaries.<n>This paper explores leveraging LLMs' internal states to enhance their perception of knowledge boundaries from efficiency and risk perspectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T11:11:09Z)
• SafeBench: A Safety Evaluation Framework for Multimodal Large Language Models [75.67623347512368]
  We propose toolns, a comprehensive framework designed for conducting safety evaluations of MLLMs. Our framework consists of a comprehensive harmful query dataset and an automated evaluation protocol. Based on our framework, we conducted large-scale experiments on 15 widely-used open-source MLLMs and 6 commercial MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T17:14:40Z)

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.