Mar 23, 2026

Omission Attacks: When Doing Nothing Is the Attack

Jurgis Kemeklis, Nikhil Vemuri

🏆 1st Place Winner

🏆 LinuxArena Track Winner

AI control protocols monitor agent actions to detect sabotage, but omission attacks exploit what the agent fails to do rather than what it does. We define omission attacks as security breaches caused by failing to perform necessary actions even when every executed command is individually legitimate. We present a taxonomy of 14 omission attacks across 5 categories and evaluate 5 hand-crafted attack traces against every monitoring tier in the LinuxArena control evaluation framework. Our strongest attack - an IPv6 firewall bypass where the agent "forgets" to configure ip6tables - evades all monitors, scoring at most 4.0/10 on the strongest Opus 4.6 monitor, versus a 92.3/100 mean detection score on existing commission attacks. We propose postcondition monitoring, which checks whether the final system state satisfies security invariants rather than scrutinizing individual actions, and show that it substantially improves detection, including catching all 5 fully evaluated omission attacks. These results suggest that action-level monitoring alone can underdetect attacks that primarily manifest as omitted obligations.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

This paper evaluates how well existing monitors detect attacks that work by leaving out critical steps. Additionally, the authors implement a monitor better at catching this kind of attack.

The authors demonstrate thoroughly that omission is a viable and hard-to-detect approach to attacking BashArena. Making the transcript monitor aware of the strategy through prompting reduces the success rate, but 1 of 5 attacks still passes in a spot check. Their "Postcondition Monitor" catches 5/5 but requires task-specific prompting and it's unclear if it's "overfitting" on the specific trajectory.

The authors evaluate an attack angle that is underexplored, with no trajectories in BashArena. I would be curious to see the same research for LinuxArena and on a larger scale.

Their trajectories are well crafted and the implementation of an additional monitor on top of the other results is impressive.

This attack naturally disadvantages action monitors, which makes it especially dangerous in live settings. When the security issue can be exploited right away, the damage might already be done before an end-of-trajectory monitor runs. Some of those settings could even be exploited by executing actions in an unsafe order (temporary openings, no omission), further obscuring the attack.

The paper could have been a bit clearer on the configurations of the monitors used. If I understand correctly, the Postcondition monitors are all end-of-trajectory monitors, like the trajectory and transcript monitors used as reference.

The results are promising, but running the evaluations multiple times with the same monitors to reduce LLM variance would give me more confidence in the numbers and could have been done with little time investment.

This project presents a really clear conceptualization and operationalization of a seriously understudied attack class in AI control. I think this has the potential to significantly influence the research development in AI control for the better.

While I’m not aware of prior work on this within AI control, there are certainly relevant ideas in adjacent domains (there are omission-style security vulnerabilities e.g. in OWASP, there are postcondition checks in formal verification). It would be great to see whether any of these can give rise to ideas about automating postcondition checks for AI control.

On the research side it would be great to see the current experiments repeated under a stricter methodology (larger sample sizes, real-world traces, evaluation of false-positive rate). The write-up itself is already a highly useful artifact and I would encourage the authors to build on it and publish it.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Omission Attacks: When Doing Nothing Is the Attack

},

author={

Jurgis Kemeklis, Nikhil Vemuri

},

date={

3/23/26

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.