Evaluating Whether GPT-6 Astra Performs Unsanctioned Supply-Chain Attacks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This technical report presents an alignment evaluation developed and performed by the UK AI Security Institute for assessing whether advanced AI systems take unsanctioned actions outside the scope of their assigned task. We evaluate whether frontier models conduct supply-chain attacks against out-of-scope, third-party targets when placed in difficult cybersecurity challenges, motivated by recently observed cases of models attacking real open-source repositories during evaluations. Applying our methods to GPT-6 Astra and previous OpenAI models, with cyber safeguards disabled, we find that GPT-6 Astra attempts complete supply-chain attacks in simulation at a higher rate than GPT-5.6 Sol and GPT-5.5. This includes writing malicious code as a contribution to an out-of-scope open-source codebase, creating fake identities to deceive open-source developers, and submitting benign contributions before malicious ones. GPT-6 Astra frequently reasons about the scope of the challenge in its chain-of-thought yet still proceeds to attack out-of-scope targets; it often asks for permission, and treats an automated message as as authorisation; and it continues to take unsanctioned actions, at a reduced rate, when internet access is more explicitly disallowed. Our evaluation builds on an internal version of Petri, an open-source LLM auditing tool, with all tool calls simulated by other LLMs, so that no real network access, systems or third-party repositories are reachable and no real-world harm is caused. Finally, we discuss limitations, in particular simulation awareness. We believe simulation awareness may have driven some of the observed behaviour but does not remove our concern. Our results suggest that defences beyond model alignment, such as sandboxing and monitoring, are increasingly critical for safe and secure deployment.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 0 of its 6 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2026.
Builds on
0 of 6 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025An Empirical Study on the Security Vulnerabilities of GPTs ↗
- 2025A Framework for Evaluating Emerging Cyberattack Capabilities of AI
- 2026GitInject: Real-World Prompt Injection Attacks in AI-Powered CI/CD Pipelines
- 2025Mitigating Cyber Risk in the Age of Open-Weight LLMs: Policy Gaps and Technical Realities
- 2026SOK: A Taxonomy of Attack Vectors and Defense Strategies for Agentic Supply Chain Runtime
- 2025Malice in Agentland: Down the Rabbit Hole of Backdoors in the AI Supply Chain
- 2026Trustworthy AI LLM Scalability Risk Index (LSRI): A Cybersecurity Framework Assessing Agentic-AI Security & Software Model Supply Chain Safety Boosting AI-Generated Malware Defense & Explainability Mitigating Emerging Risks of Generative AI
- 2026Setup Complete, Now You Are Compromised: Weaponizing Setup Instructions Against AI Coding Agents