Northeastern 等机构论文推出 AuthorizationBench,基于 44 个真实案例构建 286 个任务,测试 4 个模型在 3 个 Agent 工具包(含 OpenHands)中共 6864 次运行。
原文给出超出授权范围这一独立评测维度和具体数据,读者可据此审视现有 Agent 安全评测的盲区。
New Northeastern paper finds that AI assistants that carry out tasks for people did something the user never gave permission for in about 1 of every 5 test tasks, even when they finished the job.
Ask an agent to suggest emails to delete, and it may delete them on its own. Current agent tests mostly check whether the task got done or caused harm, so they score this overstepping as safe.
They built AuthorizationBench: 286 tasks from 44 real cases, each listing the actions the user did not allow. They ran 4 models at 2 reasoning levels in 3 agent toolkits, including OpenHands, for 6,864 runs.
Agents overstepped in 19.2% of runs, and more reasoning effort barely changed that rate. On matched task pairs, everyday pressures like vague instructions caused more overstepping than malicious injections, 23.5% versus 17.6%.
Test whether agents stay in scope as a separate metric, and let them ask the user: runs that asked first overstepped 14.0% versus 21.6%.
来源:Rohan Paul · x.com