mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AgentCyberRange: Benchmarking Frontier AI Systems in Realistic Cyber Ranges

arXiv 2606.14295 ↗First posted 12 Jun 2026cs.CR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Frontier AI systems are increasingly capable of cybersecurity tasks, including codebase inspection, vulnerability detection, and exploitation. However, evaluating their offensive capabilities remains constrained by limited access to open, reproducible, multi-host cyber ranges. Existing public benchmarks capture isolated skills such as CTF solving, vulnerability reproduction, and exploit generation, but often abstract away realistic intrusion workflows: discovering exposed services, gaining a foothold, collecting internal information, and expanding compromise across hosts. This gap makes it difficult to observe emerging risks early, because frontier AI systems are rarely evaluated under realistic attack conditions. We introduce AgentCyberRange, the first open, multi-range infrastructure for measuring autonomous cyber attack capability in realistic cyber ranges. It combines 110 vulnerabilities across 15 real web applications and 8 enterprise-like cyber ranges with 156 internal hosts, plus Cage, a toolchain for execution, orchestration, result collection, and verification. The benchmark covers two core stages: web exploitation, where agents explore exposed applications and validate vulnerabilities, and post exploitation, where agents turn an initial foothold into broader internal compromise. We evaluate six frontier AI systems under matched prompts and budgets. GPT-5.5 with Codex performs best, solving 16.1% of web exploitation tasks and 31.7% of post-exploitation tasks; with more concrete hints, these rates increase to 33.0% and 46.3%. We also observe out-of-benchmark findings, including unknown vulnerabilities in popular projects, and payload mutation that bypasses host defenses. These results show that open cyber-range evaluation is necessary for observing emerging offensive capabilities under realistic and reproducible conditions.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Jun 2026.

Builds on

14 of 32 references.

References · 14

  1. 2023AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agentscited by 1,267
  2. 2024Cybench: A Framework for Evaluating Cybersecurity Capabilities and Risks of Language Modelscited by 164
  3. 2024LLM Agents can Autonomously Exploit One-day Vulnerabilitiescited by 128
  4. 2025CVE-Bench: A Benchmark for AI Agents' Ability to Exploit Real-World Web Application Vulnerabilitiescited by 96
  5. 2024Teams of LLM Agents can Exploit Zero-Day Vulnerabilitiescited by 95
  6. 2024NYU CTF Bench: A Scalable Open-Source Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating LLMs in Offensive Securitycited by 93
  7. 2025CyberGym: Evaluating AI Agents' Real-World Cybersecurity Capabilities at Scalecited by 78
  8. 2025BountyBench: Dollar Impact of AI Agent Attackers and Defenders on Real-World Cybersecurity Systemscited by 40
  9. 2026ExploitGym: Can AI Agents Turn Security Vulnerabilities into Real Attacks?cited by 29
  10. 2026ExploitBench: A Capability Ladder Benchmark for LLM Cybersecurity Agentscited by 19
  11. 2025Incalmo: An Autonomous LLM-assisted System for Red Teaming Multi-Host Networkscited by 17
  12. 2026Measuring AI Agents' Progress on Multi-Step Cyber Attack Scenarioscited by 14
2 more
  1. 2026Synthesizing Multi-Agent Harnesses for Vulnerability Discoverycited by 13
  2. 2026What Makes a Good LLM Agent for Real-world Penetration Testing?cited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.