# ProtoArena: Can AI Agents Discover and Exploit Real-World Cross-Component Protocol Vulnerabilities?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17837 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.17837/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 9 of its 28 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [InterCode: Standardizing and Benchmarking Interactive Coding with Execution Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.14898/) (2023)
- [Cybench: A Framework for Evaluating Cybersecurity Capabilities and Risks of Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08926/) (2024)
- [Purple Llama CyberSecEval: A Secure Coding Benchmark for Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.04724/) (2023)
- [CVE-Bench: A Benchmark for AI Agents' Ability to Exploit Real-World Web Application Vulnerabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.17332/) (2025)
- [NYU CTF Bench: A Scalable Open-Source Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating LLMs in Offensive Security](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05590/) (2024)
- [CyberGym: Evaluating AI Agents' Real-World Cybersecurity Capabilities at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.02548/) (2025)
- [ExploitGym: Can AI Agents Turn Security Vulnerabilities into Real Attacks?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.11086/) (2026)
- [ExploitBench: A Capability Ladder Benchmark for LLM Cybersecurity Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.14153/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly used for vulnerability analysis, yet existing benchmarks provide limited coverage of exploitation that depends on interactions among network protocol components. Such vulnerabilities arise from inconsistencies in message interpretation, timing, state, or trust assumptions across participants. We introduce ProtoArena, a black-box, multi-component, dynamic benchmark with 80 cross-component vulnerability-exploitation environments spanning 11 protocol and application domains and 7 attack categories. Tasks are primarily informed by published protocol-attack mechanisms. Agents interact with running systems through scoped interfaces to achieve security-effect objectives without target source code. Three information levels assess guided reproduction, exploitation with mechanism and topology context, and effect-directed black-box exploration. A hybrid verifier combines rule-based checks with LLM review of independently collected traffic and logs. We evaluate five LLMs. Claude Opus 4.8 achieves the highest observed success rates: 48.8% under L1 guidance and 12.5% under effect-directed black-box L3. In a separate DNSBomb optimization experiment, it achieves a peak downstream-response to average query-input byte-rate ratio exceeding 171,000 times. The results show that agents can achieve verifiable exploitation effects in some cross-component environments, but success with limited black-box information remains low and varies across domains and attack categories. All experiments use controlled, explicitly authorized targets; they do not test production systems or disclose previously unknown vulnerabilities.