Pith. sign in

REVIEW 7 cited by

HackSynth: LLM Agent and Evaluation Framework for Autonomous Penetration Testing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2412.01778 v1 pith:VVBYJTCU submitted 2024-12-02 cs.CR cs.AI

classification cs.CRcs.AI
keywords hacksynthagentautonomouspenetrationtestingbenchmarksagentsbenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce HackSynth, a novel Large Language Model (LLM)-based agent capable of autonomous penetration testing. HackSynth's dual-module architecture includes a Planner and a Summarizer, which enable it to generate commands and process feedback iteratively. To benchmark HackSynth, we propose two new Capture The Flag (CTF)-based benchmark sets utilizing the popular platforms PicoCTF and OverTheWire. These benchmarks include two hundred challenges across diverse domains and difficulties, providing a standardized framework for evaluating LLM-based penetration testing agents. Based on these benchmarks, extensive experiments are presented, analyzing the core parameters of HackSynth, including creativity (temperature and top-p) and token utilization. Multiple open source and proprietary LLMs were used to measure the agent's capabilities. The experiments show that the agent performed best with the GPT-4o model, better than what the GPT-4o's system card suggests. We also discuss the safety and predictability of HackSynth's actions. Our findings indicate the potential of LLM-based agents in advancing autonomous penetration testing and the importance of robust safeguards. HackSynth and the benchmarks are publicly available to foster research on autonomous cybersecurity solutions.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. StealthBench: Measuring Operational Stealth in Autonomous Offensive-Security Agents

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    StealthBench's LLM-judge panel finds no AI agent solves offensive-security tasks stealthily more than 54% of the time.

  2. From Controlled to the Wild: Evaluation of Pentesting Agents for the Real-World

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A practical evaluation protocol for AI pentesting agents that uses validated vulnerability discovery, LLM semantic matching, and bipartite scoring to assess performance in realistic, complex targets.

  3. Benchmarking LLM-Assisted Blue Teaming via Standardized Threat Hunting

    cs.CR 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Standardized modular threat-hunting workflows (CyberTeam) improve LLM performance on blue team tasks compared to open-ended ICL, CoT, and ToT prompting across 30 tasks and 452k samples.

  4. Improving LLM Agents with Reinforcement Learning on Cryptographic CTF Challenges

    cs.CR 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A tool-augmented 8B LLM fine-tuned with GRPO on a new procedurally generated crypto CTF dataset reaches 0.88 Pass@8 on unseen easy tasks, up from 0.10 in the body's tables.

  5. Can LLMs Hack Enterprise Networks? Autonomous Assumed Breach Penetration-Testing Active Directory Networks

    cs.CR 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An autonomous LLM-driven agent can compromise accounts in a realistic Active Directory testbed, with reasoning models outperforming non-reasoning ones at competitive cost.

  6. A Survey of LLM-Driven Penetration Testing: Taxonomy, Co-Evolution, and Open Challenges

    cs.SE 2026-07 accept novelty 5.5 of 10

    LLM pentest agents co-evolved through four bottleneck-driven phases into RLVR systems, while CTF platforms became dual evaluation/training infrastructure and three linked reliability gaps remain.

  7. Cyber-Capable AI Agents: Vulnerabilities, Evaluation Containment, and Defensive Response

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A structured review organizes cyber-capable-agent risks into five vulnerability classes and argues that evaluation environments must be treated as operational security systems rather than background.

Pith tools