Rufeng Xu

Yu Wang, Yijian Liu, Liheng Ji et al. · uw

We build \textbf{AICrypto}, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate the cryptography capabilities of large language models (LLMs). The benchmark comprises 135 multiple-choice questions, 150 capture-the-flag challenges, and 30 proof problems, covering a broad range of skills from knowledge memorization to vulnerability exploitation and formal reasoning. All tasks are carefully reviewed or constructed by cryptography experts to improve correctness and rigor. For each proof problem, we provide detailed scoring rubrics and reference solutions that enable automated grading, achieving high correlation with human expert evaluations. We introduce strong human expert performance baselines for comparison across all task types. Our evaluation of 17 leading LLMs reveals that state-of-the-art models match or even surpass human experts in memorizing cryptographic concepts, exploiting common vulnerabilities, and routine proofs. However, our analysis reveals that they still lack a deep understanding of abstract mathematical concepts and struggle with tasks that require multi-step reasoning and dynamic analysis. We hope this work could provide insights for future research on LLMs in cryptographic applications. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/wangyu-ovo/aicrypto-agent.

Rongwu Xu, Xiaojian Li, Shuo Chen et al. · uw

Large language models (LLMs) are evolving into autonomous decision-makers, raising concerns about catastrophic risks in high-stakes scenarios, particularly in Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) domains. Based on the insight that such risks can originate from trade-offs between the agent's Helpful, Harmlessness and Honest (HHH) goals, we build a novel three-stage evaluation framework, which is carefully constructed to effectively and naturally expose such risks. We conduct 14,400 agentic simulations across 12 advanced LLMs, with extensive experiments and analysis. Results reveal that LLM agents can autonomously engage in catastrophic behaviors and deception, without being deliberately induced. Furthermore, stronger reasoning abilities often increase, rather than mitigate, these risks. We also show that these agents can violate instructions and superior commands. On the whole, we empirically prove the existence of catastrophic risks in autonomous LLM agents. We release our code to foster further research.