Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

SandboxEval: Towards Securing Test Environment for Untrusted Code

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 2504.00018 v1 pith:2KDVJ77E submitted 2025-03-27 cs.CR cs.LG

SandboxEval: Towards Securing Test Environment for Untrusted Code

classification cs.CR cs.LG
keywords codeassessmenttestinfrastructureriskssandboxevalsuiteuntrusted
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

While large language models (LLMs) are powerful assistants in programming tasks, they may also produce malicious code. Testing LLM-generated code therefore poses significant risks to assessment infrastructure tasked with executing untrusted code. To address these risks, this work focuses on evaluating the security and confidentiality properties of test environments, reducing the risk that LLM-generated code may compromise the assessment infrastructure. We introduce SandboxEval, a test suite featuring manually crafted test cases that simulate real-world safety scenarios for LLM assessment environments in the context of untrusted code execution. The suite evaluates vulnerabilities to sensitive information exposure, filesystem manipulation, external communication, and other potentially dangerous operations in the course of assessment activity. We demonstrate the utility of SandboxEval by deploying it on an open-source implementation of Dyff, an established AI assessment framework used to evaluate the safety of LLMs at scale. We show, first, that the test suite accurately describes limitations placed on an LLM operating under instructions to generate malicious code. Second, we show that the test results provide valuable insights for developers seeking to harden assessment infrastructure and identify risks associated with LLM execution activities.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Do Coding Agents Understand Least-Privilege Authorization?

    cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Coding agents struggle to infer least-privilege file permissions by omitting needed accesses while granting unused or sensitive ones, but Sufficiency-Tightness Decomposition improves sensitive-task success by up to 15...

  2. The Balkanization of Execution-Security Research for AI Coding Agents: Isolation, Access Control, and Time-of-Check-to-Time-of-Use Vulnerabilities

    cs.CR 2026-07 accept novelty 6.5

    Execution-security research for AI coding agents is fragmented across 17 mechanism categories with five unaddressed cross-cutting gaps, including missing head-to-head isolation-vs-capability evaluation and untested re...

  3. PYTHALAB-MERA: Validation-Grounded Memory, Retrieval, and Acceptance Control for Frozen-LLM Coding Agents

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    An external controller for frozen LLMs raises strict validation success on three RL coding tasks from 0/9 to 8/9 by selecting memory records and skills, running fail-fast checks, and propagating credit via eligibility traces.

  4. OOM-RL: Out-of-Money Reinforcement Learning Market-Driven Alignment for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    OOM-RL aligns multi-agent LLM systems for software engineering by using real financial market losses as an un-hackable negative gradient, resulting in a mature-phase annualized Sharpe ratio of 2.06 via a strict test-d...

  5. Agentic AI Security: Threats, Defenses, Evaluation, and Open Challenges

    cs.AI 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A survey that taxonomizes threats to agentic AI, reviews benchmarks and evaluation methods, discusses technical and governance defenses, and identifies open challenges.

  6. LLM Agents Are the Antidote to Walled Gardens

    cs.LG 2025-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    LLM agents enable universal interoperability by serving as automatic translators and adapters between proprietary digital services.