Laurent Simon

Mary Phuong, Erik Jenner, Laurent Simon et al.

AI agents are rapidly accelerating work at frontier AI companies, helping with AI R&D, cyber-defence, and advancing scientific discoveries. As these agents become more tightly integrated into our systems, unlocking their full potential requires rethinking how we do security. We should not assume that AI agents are always perfectly aligned, but should instead build in multiple layers of defence. We present the GDM AI Control Roadmap (v0.1) -- a first-of-its-kind blueprint for internal security against potentially misaligned AI. This report provides: * Threat modelling: We adopt a conservative approach to threat modelling and assume a hypothetical AI adversary pursuing undesirable goals in internal deployment. We introduce TRAIT&R, a taxonomy of tactics and techniques available to such a hypothetical AI adversary, building on the established security framework MITRE ATT&CK. * Capability-based mitigation: Because controlling more capable models requires more costly interventions, we link specific defensive measures to evolving model capabilities (such as the ability to reason opaquely or execute complex cyberattacks). As models get more powerful, our defences should escalate accordingly. We outline four Detection tiers (D1-D4) and three Prevention and Response tiers (R1-R3). * A portfolio of practical defences: We suggest 15 concrete, tiered mitigations. These range from low-cost interventions for current models (e.g., chain-of-thought monitoring, asynchronous alerts) to advanced safeguards for future models (e.g., real-time access control, system-level anomaly detection, internal activations monitoring, and shutdown infrastructure). AI control is a nascent field, and implementing these mitigations requires navigating difficult trade-offs between security and developer velocity. We expect the roadmap to evolve as we gain more experience and as the field in turn evolves.

Gilles Audemard, Loïc Paulevé, Laurent Simon

SAT research has a long history of source code and binary releases, thanks to competitions organized every year. However, since every cycle of competitions has its own set of rules and an adhoc way of publishing source code and binaries, compiling or even running any solver may be harder than what it seems. Moreover, there has been more than a thousand solvers published so far, some of them released in the early 90's. If the SAT community wants to archive and be able to keep track of all the solvers that made its history, it urgently needs to deploy an important effort. We propose to initiate a community-driven effort to archive and to allow easy compilation and running of all SAT solvers that have been released so far. We rely on the best tools for archiving and building binaries (thanks to Docker, GitHub and Zenodo) and provide a consistent and easy way for this. Thanks to our tool, building (or running) a solver from its source (or from its binary) can be done in one line.

Sheharbano Khattak, Laurent Simon, Steven J. Murdoch

An increasing number of countries implement Internet censorship at different scales and for a variety of reasons. In particular, the link between the censored client and entry point to the uncensored network is a frequent target of censorship due to the ease with which a nation-state censor can control it. A number of censorship resistance systems have been developed thus far to help circumvent blocking on this link, which we refer to as link circumvention systems (LCs). The variety and profusion of attack vectors available to a censor has led to an arms race, leading to a dramatic speed of evolution of LCs. Despite their inherent complexity and the breadth of work in this area, there is no systematic way to evaluate link circumvention systems and compare them against each other. In this paper, we (i) sketch an attack model to comprehensively explore a censor's capabilities, (ii) present an abstract model of a LC, a system that helps a censored client communicate with a server over the Internet while resisting censorship, (iii) describe an evaluation stack that underscores a layered approach to evaluate LCs, and (iv) systemize and evaluate existing censorship resistance systems that provide link circumvention. We highlight open challenges in the evaluation and development of LCs and discuss possible mitigations.