Fok Kar Wai

Kar Wai Fok, Vrizlynn L. L. Thing

Malwares are the key means leveraged by threat actors in the cyber space for their attacks. There is a large array of commercial solutions in the market and significant scientific research to tackle the challenge of the detection and defense against malwares. At the same time, attackers also advance their capabilities in creating polymorphic and metamorphic malwares to make it increasingly challenging for existing solutions. To tackle this issue, we propose a methodology to perform malware detection and family attribution. The proposed methodology first performs the extraction of opcodes from malwares in each family and constructs their respective opcode graphs. We explore the use of clustering algorithms on the opcode graphs to detect clusters of malwares within the same malware family. Such clusters can be seen as belonging to different sub-family groups. Opcode graph signatures are built from each detected cluster. Hence, for each malware family, a group of signatures is generated to represent the family. These signatures are used to classify an unknown sample as benign or belonging to one the malware families. We evaluate our methodology by performing experiments on a dataset consisting of both benign files and malware samples belonging to a number of different malware families and comparing the results to existing approach.

Zihao Wang, Yiming Li, Yutong Wu et al.

Web agents driven by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world environments, where they operate over untrusted web content and execute actions with direct consequences. This makes them vulnerable to prompt-injection attacks, in which seemingly benign content embeds adversarial instructions that manipulate agent behaviour. Existing security benchmarks adopt an \textit{attack-centric} perspective, focusing on the technical feasibility of injections while overlooking the nuanced distribution of resulting harms. In practice, however, prompt-injection risk is victim-dependent: a single exploit can produce asymmetric consequences for different stakeholders, and the same attack pattern may exhibit substantially different effectiveness depending on whom it targets. To capture these properties, we introduce \textbf{\sysname}, a \textit{stakeholder-centric} benchmark to systematically categorize and attribute harm in real-world web agent systems. It distinguishes between affected entities (e.g., user, seller, platform), decomposes the attacks into concrete objectives, and evaluates each case with complementary outcome- and process-level metrics. Our results reveal substantial and heterogeneous vulnerabilities: not a single attack objective is reliably resisted by current agents, and failures distribute across qualitatively distinct modes ranging from \emph{stealthy parasitism} (attack succeeds without disrupting the user's delegated task) to \emph{misaligned disruption} (task disrupted without attack success) and \emph{compounded failure} (both adversarial objective and task integrity simultaneously violated). These patterns are missed by conventional evaluation, highlighting the need for stakeholder-aware assessment of LLM-based agents in real-world deployments. Benchmark is available at https://github.com/StakeBench/SBC.