Towards Effective Offensive Security LLM Agents: Hyperparameter Tuning, LLM as a Judge, and a Lightweight CTF Benchmark
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent advances in LLM agentic systems have improved the automation of offensive security tasks, particularly for Capture the Flag (CTF) challenges. We systematically investigate the key factors that drive agent success and provide a detailed recipe for building effective LLM-based offensive security agents. First, we present CTFJudge, a framework leveraging LLM as a judge to analyze agent trajectories and provide granular evaluation across CTF solving steps. Second, we propose a novel metric, CTF Competency Index (CCI) for partial correctness, revealing how closely agent solutions align with human-crafted gold standards. Third, we examine how LLM hyperparameters, namely temperature, top-p, and maximum token length, influence agent performance and automated cybersecurity task planning. For rapid evaluation, we present CTFTiny, a curated benchmark of 50 representative CTF challenges across binary exploitation, web, reverse engineering, forensics, and cryptography. Our findings identify optimal multi-agent coordination settings and lay the groundwork for future LLM agent research in cybersecurity. We make CTFTiny open source to public https://github.com/NYU-LLM-CTF/CTFTiny along with CTFJudge on https://github.com/NYU-LLM-CTF/CTFJudge.
Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 11 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Aug 2025.
Builds on
11 of 18 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025CRAKEN: Cybersecurity LLM Agent with Knowledge-Based Execution21 May
- 2025D-CIPHER: Dynamic Collaborative Intelligent Multi-Agent System with Planner and Heterogeneous Executors for Offensive Security15 Feb
Other references · 9
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,242
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
- 2024LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methodscited by 465
- 2023InterCode: Standardizing and Benchmarking Interactive Coding with Execution Feedbackcited by 238
- 2024NYU CTF Bench: A Scalable Open-Source Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating LLMs in Offensive Securitycited by 93
- 2024An Empirical Evaluation of LLMs for Solving Offensive Security Challengescited by 35
- 2023Using Large Language Models for Cybersecurity Capture-The-Flag Challenges and Certification Questionscited by 23
- 2025Multi-Agent LLM Judge: automatic personalized LLM judge design for evaluating natural language generation applicationscited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 12.
12 papers.
- 2026Security in LLM-as-a-Judge: A Comprehensive SoKcited by 5
- 2026CTFExplorer: Evaluating LLM Offensive Agents Through Multi-Target Web CTF Benchmarkingcited by 3
- 2026AI In Cybersecurity Education -- Scalable Agentic CTF Design Principles and Educational Outcomescited by 1
- 2026Autonomous Adversary: Red-Teaming in the age of LLMcited by 1
- 2026LLMs for Secure Hardware Design and Related Problems: Opportunities and Challengescited by 1
- 2026Cyber-Capable AI Agents: Vulnerabilities, Evaluation Containment, and Defensive Responsecited by 1
- 2026The Next Challenge for Agentic Cybersecurity: A Realistic, Contamination-Free Reverse Engineering Benchmarkcited by 1
- 2026RAVEN: Retrieval-Augmented Vulnerability Exploration Network for Memory Corruption Analysis in User Code and Binary Programscited by 0
- 2026Determinants and Limits of LLM Security-Tool Orchestration: A Study with HexStrike-AIcited by 0
- 2026Semi-Automated Detection of Gaps in LLM Security Knowledgecited by 0
- 2026Reveree: Diagnosing LLM Reverse-Engineering Agentscited by 0
- 2026Humans vs. Machines: A Comparison With AI Agents in Software Reverse Engineeringcited by 0
- 2026Humans vs. Machines: A Comparison With AI Agents in Software Reverse Engineering10 Oct 2026
- 2026Reveree: Diagnosing LLM Reverse-Engineering Agents1 Sep 2026
- 2026The Next Challenge for Agentic Cybersecurity: A Realistic, Contamination-Free Reverse Engineering Benchmark11 Aug 2026
- 2026Cyber-Capable AI Agents: Vulnerabilities, Evaluation Containment, and Defensive Response28 Jul 2026
- 2026Semi-Automated Detection of Gaps in LLM Security Knowledge20 Jul 2026
- 2026Determinants and Limits of LLM Security-Tool Orchestration: A Study with HexStrike-AI3 Jul 2026
- 2026LLMs for Secure Hardware Design and Related Problems: Opportunities and Challenges11 May 2026
- 2026Autonomous Adversary: Red-Teaming in the age of LLM7 May 2026
- 2026RAVEN: Retrieval-Augmented Vulnerability Exploration Network for Memory Corruption Analysis in User Code and Binary Programs20 Apr 2026
- 2026Security in LLM-as-a-Judge: A Comprehensive SoK31 Mar 2026
- 2026AI In Cybersecurity Education -- Scalable Agentic CTF Design Principles and Educational Outcomes23 Mar 2026
- 2026CTFExplorer: Evaluating LLM Offensive Agents Through Multi-Target Web CTF Benchmarking8 Feb 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Autonomous LLM Agents & CTFs: A Second Look
- 2026CTFusion: A CTF-based Benchmark for LLM Agent Evaluation
- 2026How Do LLM Agents Actually Get the Flag? Trace-Level Provenance for Agentic Offensive Security Evaluation
- 2026Do Agents Dream of Root Shells? Partial-Credit Evaluation of LLM Agents in Capture the Flag Challenges
- 2024EnIGMA: Interactive Tools Substantially Assist LM Agents in Finding Security Vulnerabilities
- 2026When LLMs Team Up: A Coordinated Attack Framework for Automated Cyber Intrusions
- 2026Capture the Flags: Family-Based Evaluation of Agentic LLMs via Semantics-Preserving Transformations
- 2024Hacking CTFs with Plain Agents