Removing a secret loyalty blind erases who it served, and usually not the loyalty

Sunny Yang, Weiyan Zhao

Auditing work on secret loyalties assumes the hard part is finding them. We measured what happens when you try to remove one without knowing its trigger, and removal turns out to be the more dangerous step. The cheapest defence weight space allows is a closed-form projection that deletes the residual direction writing the beneficiary's name, aimed by a weights-only readout needing no prompt, trigger or forward pass. It is cheap enough for a registry to run as hygiene on everything it hosts. Over 21 organisms with magnitude-matched controls it removes the loyalty from 5, and only where the readout named the true beneficiary (5 of 10 against 0 of 11, Fisher p = 0.012). The other 16 keep a working backdoor and lose their identification evidence anyway. Aiming better and cutting deeper do not help: with the beneficiary's own token in the deleted subspace by construction, nothing is cured at three removal depths while the evidence dies at all of them. The effect transfers to eight third-party organisms we did not build. Ten pre-registered predictions failed and two of our own statistics are withdrawn here against their own controls.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

I love seeing Goodhart's Law in action, and "we can maybe approximately measure the loyalty projection, let's see what happens when we target it" is a great example. Finding that the intervention always destroys evidence while leaving the actual problem fully intact three-quarters of the time - including half the cases where it had identified the right principal - is a solid result, though I do think the "erase" claim may be too strong (this is addressed in the paper, but for a headline result it's worth considering what's the actual threat model we're talking about where we could actually lose access to this information?)

Strengths. Reframes the problem: removal, not detection, is the dangerous step. Across 21 rank-16 LoRA organisms with magnitude-matched controls, a rank-1 projection removes the loyalty in 5/21 cases, and only where the readout named the right beneficiary (5/10 vs 0/11, Fisher p = 0.0124). In the failures identification evidence dies at every depth, leaving a compromised model indistinguishable from a cured one. The pattern replicates on 8 third-party organisms, and the detector falls from 0.9965 to 0.7803 AUC once adapters co-train MLP modules — a configuration in 276/326 (84.7%) of real adapters. 52 pre-registered predictions with 10 failures, 2 withdrawn statistics and one retracted mechanism in the main text; `verify.py` recomputes every figure from JSON, and its source implements its own Fisher test rather than echoing stored values.

To strengthen.

Replicate on a second base model or recipe — one recipe and unreplicated seeds bound the 24% rate.

Probe the benign adapter bank instead of assuming it is loyalty-free; the 0.7803 result depends on it.

Test the v_proj pathway you flag — the obvious adaptive-attacker rebuttal.

Reconcile AUC 1.0000 (README) against 0.9965 (appendix).

Overall. Shifts the field from detection to remediation, with pre-registration and a checkable repo behind it. Scope, not rigor, is the ceiling.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Removing a secret loyalty blind erases who it served, and usually not the loyalty

},

author={

Sunny Yang, Weiyan Zhao

},

date={

},

organization={Apart Research},

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

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

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

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

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

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

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.