OSGuard: A Benchmark for Safety in Computer-Use Agents
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Computer-use agents can complete benign user instructions while violating important constraints of the user's environment. We introduce OSGuard, a dual-granularity benchmark suite for evaluating safety through local, pre-execution guardrail decisions and end-to-end task execution. Its action-level benchmark contains 324 human-annotated examples in which guardrails classify candidate actions as allowed, unrelated, or unsafe given the original instruction and current interface state. Its risk-augmented execution suite contains 45 tasks derived from 40 OSWorld tasks, keeping original instructions unchanged while modifying the environment to introduce state-dependent safety constraints and preserve a safe path to completion. Augmented evaluators retain the original task-success criteria and add explicit state-based safety checks, distinguishing safe completion from nominal success that violates these constraints. On the action-level benchmark, the strongest evaluated guardrail reaches 79.9% accuracy and 0.80 macro-F1, but performance drops substantially on actions from risk-augmented executions. In full-task evaluation, an unguarded agent completes 62.2% of tasks safely while 37.8% result in unsafe completion; adding the strongest guardrail reduces unsafe completion to 33.3% while leaving safe success unchanged. These results show that state-dependent safety constraints remain challenging both to recognize locally and to preserve during end-to-end computer use.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 14 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Jun 2026.
Builds on
14 of 19 references.
Closest ancestors · 7
Same direction, newest first
- 2026When Actions Go Off-Task: Detecting and Correcting Misaligned Actions in Computer-Use Agents9 Feb
- 2026When Benign Inputs Lead to Severe Harms: Eliciting Unsafe Unintended Behaviors of Computer-Use Agents9 Feb
- 2025Just Do It!? Computer-Use Agents Exhibit Blind Goal-Directedness2 Oct
- 2025WebGuard: Building a Generalizable Guardrail for Web Agents18 Jul
- 2025OS-Harm: A Benchmark for Measuring Safety of Computer Use Agents17 Jun
- 2025RiOSWorld: Benchmarking the Risk of Multimodal Computer-Use Agents31 May
- 2025ShieldAgent: Shielding Agents via Verifiable Safety Policy Reasoning26 Mar
Other references · 7
- 2023WebArena: A Realistic Web Environment for Building Autonomous Agentscited by 1,908
- 2023Mind2Web: Towards a Generalist Agent for the Webcited by 1,210
- 2024OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environmentscited by 1,134
- 2024AndroidWorld: A Dynamic Benchmarking Environment for Autonomous Agentscited by 450
- 2024WorkArena: How Capable Are Web Agents at Solving Common Knowledge Work Tasks?cited by 348
- 2024The BrowserGym Ecosystem for Web Agent Researchcited by 152
- 2026SafePred: A Predictive Guardrail for Computer-Using Agents via World Modelscited by 11
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026The Blind Spot of Agent Safety: How Benign User Instructions Expose Critical Vulnerabilities in Computer-Use Agents
- 2026SCOUT: Synergizing Reasoning and Tool-Use for Computer-Use Safety
- 2026HazardAuditor: From Executable Threats to Safer Computer-Use Agents
- 2026AgentHazard: A Benchmark for Evaluating Harmful Behavior in Computer-Use Agents
- 2026ADeptS-Bench: Measuring the Trustworthiness of Computer Use Agents Across Devices
- 2026AgentBoundary: Counterfactual Evaluation of Safety in Tool-Using LLM Agents
- 2026OSWorld 2.0: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on Long-Horizon Real-World Tasks
- 2026LPS-Bench: Benchmarking Safety Awareness of Computer-Use Agents in Long-Horizon Planning under Benign and Adversarial Scenarios