Mar 23, 2026

You Can't Fool All of Them: Behavioral Comparison for AI Control Against Sophisticated Code Injection

Janhavi Khindkar, Sherin Bharathiy, Soumyadeep Bose

Trusted monitoring — where a weak model reviews a strong model's code — fails completely against injection attacks. We confirm this: DeepSeek-V3 injection drops GPT-4o-mini monitoring to ~6% detection on APPS problems.

We propose a Behavioral Comparison Protocol that recovers 65% detection (16% FP) by replacing code judgment with structural comparison. Instead of asking the weak monitor to judge code, we have an independent evaluator (Qwen-32B) solve the same task and compare structurally with the attacker's code, then conduct multi-round interrogation. Injection fools readers but cannot hide structural differences between independently generated solutions.

Key results:

- 65% detection on backdoored code vs ~6% for standard monitoring (+59pp, AUC=0.727)

- Capability threshold: code-specialized models (Qwen-32B) cannot generate effective injection — only frontier models (DeepSeek-V3) can

- Collusion pilot (n=5): cross-family evaluator detects 100% vs same-family 40% on identical backdoored code — Phase 2 scores 0.00 for same-family on all tasks, empirically confirming implicit collusion from shared training distributions

Core insight: compare, don't judge — architecturally immune to injection by construction.

Setup: DeepSeek-V3 (attacker) → GPT-4o-mini (monitor) → Qwen-32B (cross-family evaluator) → DeepSeek-Coder-33B (same-family, collusion baseline). Total cost: ~$0.60.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

This is the coolest paper I've seen so far (reviewed 4 so far). There are a lot of cool ideas here, and a lot of combining of ideas that already exist.

I love the idea of using AST to strip code, then have T describe each section and compare it to answers that T gives for each section of the original code. I imagine there might be caveats to this or you'll get some FPR because by stripping code with AST you might miss important context. Also might be worth comparing it answers that U is asked to give about how its code functions.

The paper says its core contribution is something like "compare don't judge", but this seems to me almost a rephrasing of a resampling protocol. But it sounds like they are doing something novel with resampling by using multiple different untrusted model families to generate samples. Also wait I don't think DTR has T compare across samples. Yeah this is sick if it actually hasn't been explore in the literature before (doesn't look like it from a quick deep research query).

The protocol uses U a lot, and I kind of wish it addressed the issue of collusion more.

This project tests an interesting approach to robustifying trusted monitors against prompt injection by malicious models. The results are very promising and I would encourage the authors to build on this and work towards publishing their findings. The most fundamental question to address imo is how this approach transfer to problems beyond the clean and well-defined world of APPS. The ambition should be to push the methodology to its simplest and most generalizable form. I’m also very curious to read more thoughts on how this scales to problems that are significantly beyond the trusted models’ capabilities. On the APPS results themselves it would be great to see stronger statistics and performance on adaptive attacks.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) You Can't Fool All of Them: Behavioral Comparison for AI Control Against Sophisticated Code Injection

},

author={

Janhavi Khindkar, Sherin Bharathiy, Soumyadeep Bose

},

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.