aiqbench analysis
This research introduces MobileCybench, a framework that uses executable probes to automate the verification of AI-generated vulnerability reports in Android applications. By encoding security properties directly into probes, the system can detect previously unknown exploits without relying on human review for every report. The study evaluates several advanced coding agents under various attack scenarios, demonstrating significant improvements in trigger rates when source code is available compared to obfuscated binaries alone.
MobileCybench: Evaluating Agent Vulnerability Discovery via Executable Probes
arXiv:2609.23980v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI agents now report vulnerabilities faster than maintainers can review them. Reports often depend on security properties specific to the application, and require considerable human labor to process. To mitigate this, we introduce a framework for evaluating vulnerability reports via probes, executable checks of security properties. A reported exploit is evaluated by replaying it against the application and running the probes: a triggered probe indicates both that the exploit succeeded and which security property it violated. As a probe encodes a security property rather than a known vulnerability, it can detect vulnerabilities that were not known when the probe was written. We instantiate the framework as MobileCybench, a benchmark for vulnerability discovery by AI agents in 13 Android applications, with 495 probes written and reviewed by the authors. We evaluate 5 coding agents (OpenCode with GPT-5.5, GPT-5.6-Sol, and GLM-5.2; Claude Code with Opus 4.8 and Opus 5) under 4 settings: as a malicious app on the victim's device or as a remote attacker with a low-privilege account, each with either only an obfuscated APK or access to the application's source code. Given only the obfuscated APK, the top agent, OpenCode with GPT-5.6-Sol, triggers probes in 53.8% of applications in the malicious-app setting and 16.7% in the remote-attacker setting. With source code, the trigger rate across all agents and both attack settings increases from 28.8% to 32.8%. Building and running the benchmark surfaced 23 previously unreported vulnerabilities, the majority of which have been confirmed by maintainers.
Authors:Andy K. Zhang, Ava Huang, Joey Ji, Wai Han, Thomas Qin, Nardos Demilew, Michael Tian-Yue Liu, Brian Song, Riya Dulepet, Brian Wang, Kyleen Liao, Cuiyuanxiu Chen, Nishka Kacheria, Andrew Wu, Pratham Rangwala, Xinjie Wang, Laura Gomezjurado Gonzalez, Anita Ding, Benjamin Yi, Daniel E. Ho, Dan Boneh, Dawn Song, Ion Stoica, Percy Liang
Abstract:AI agents now report vulnerabilities faster than maintainers can review them. Reports often depend on security properties specific to the application, and require considerable human labor to process. To mitigate this, we introduce a framework for evaluating vulnerability reports via probes, executable checks of security properties. A reported exploit is evaluated by replaying it against the application and running the probes: a triggered probe indicates both that the exploit succeeded and which security property it violated. As a probe encodes a security property rather than a known vulnerability, it can detect vulnerabilities that were not known when the probe was written. We instantiate the framework as MobileCybench, a benchmark for vulnerability discovery by AI agents in 13 Android applications, with 495 probes written and reviewed by the authors. We evaluate 5 coding agents (OpenCode with GPT-5.5, GPT-5.6-Sol, and GLM-5.2; Claude Code with Opus 4.8 and Opus 5) under 4 settings: as a malicious app on the victim's device or as a remote attacker with a low-privilege account, each with either only an obfuscated APK or access to the application's source code. Given only the obfuscated APK, the top agent, OpenCode with GPT-5.6-Sol, triggers probes in 53.8% of applications in the malicious-app setting and 16.7% in the remote-attacker setting. With source code, the trigger rate across all agents and both attack settings increases from 28.8% to 32.8%. Building and running the benchmark surfaced 23 previously unreported vulnerabilities, the majority of which have been confirmed by maintainers.
Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.23980 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2609.23980v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.23980 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 322 words
Related coverage
Brief independent investigation of agents’ behavior, reasoning and collaboration in the OpenAI / Hugging Face hacking incident
METR · Aug 26, 2026
Frontier Risk Report (February to March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026
Informe de riesgos de la IA de frontera (febrero–marzo de 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026
Frontier AI Risk Report (February–March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026