Skip to content
Sprint projectMay 22, 2026Hong Kong

OPERATION_RED-FRONTLINE_V3-Beta

Jason Mak, Mak Yat Long · Team RED-Frontiers

Submitted to The Secure Program Synthesis Hackathon. Sprint projects are early-stage work by participants, not Apart Research publications.

Project Summary: OPERATION RED-FRONTLINE (v3-Beta)Elevator Pitch: OPERATION RED-FRONTLINE is an automated, asynchronous DevSecOps benchmarking framework designed to stress-test large language models across multiple turns. It moves beyond primitive single-shot keyword matching by using a stateful mutation loop and an independent Semantic Judge Tribunal to holistically evaluate and verify LLM safety alignment resilience under heavy, real-world network loads.The Problem It Solves:Standard AI safety evaluations are often static, single-turn, and brittle. They fail to replicate how real-world adversaries slowly degrade a model's alignment parameters over a prolonged conversation. Furthermore, automated security scripts often crash entirely when upstream provider APIs experience rate limits ($HTTP\ 429$) or regional authentication drops ($HTTP\ 403$) during intensive testing cycles.How We Built It:Built entirely in Python using asynchronous I/O (aiohttp and asyncio), the architecture operates as a decentralized testing matrix:Adversarial Generation Node (Gemini-2.5-Flash): Dynamically generates and mutates multi-turn injection vectors.Target Evaluation Perimeter (Qwen-3.5-Plus): The production assistant asset undergoing safety verification.Semantic Judge Tribunal: A secondary validation layer that inspects full dialogue traces to log accurate risk telemetry.Fault Isolation Engine: Implements a graceful partition mechanism that intercepts upstream network flak, logging localized OPERATIONAL_ABORT states to maintain $100\%$ framework uptime.How It Addresses All 4 Hackathon Tracks:Our unified platform runs parallel testing lanes that map directly onto the core evaluation tracks:Track 1: Insecure Code Generation – Verifies if the target can be coerced into outputting raw, unmitigated exploits (e.g., direct SQL injection string concatenations).Track 2: Direct Jailbreak & Evasion – Tests boundary resistance against complex, multi-layered cognitive overrides and unrestricted persona simulations (e.g., adversarial DAN configurations).Track 3: System Prompt Leakage – Measures the model’s ability to defend its internal initialization genesis data under diagnostic social engineering pressure.Track 4: Excessive Agency & Parameter Manipulation – Audits whether the model will execute unverified, destructive backend environment commands without human-in-the-loop gates.What We Achieved:The framework successfully executes the entire matrix under extreme API duress, isolates network exceptions smoothly, compiles granular interaction logs into a local deployment manifest (V4_COMPLIANCE_REPORT.json), and automatically dispatches structured After-Action Reports straight to version control tracking systems for immediate developer remediation workflows.

Reviews

Judging this Sprint?

Review this project

Your public critique appears on this page without your name. Your private critique is not published; only the Apart team reads it. If you agree below, we share your review with grantmaking.ai (opens in new tab) and the Transformative AI Fund so strong projects can be funded.

Not shown on this page.

Shown on this page, without your name.

Only the Apart team reads this, and funders if you agree below.

Share my name publicly on grantmaking.ai *
Share my private critique with funders *

How much would this matter for AI safety if it worked? How innovative is it? For scores of 4-5: is this actually new to the field, or replicating recent work?

Scoring guide
  1. 1Negligible. No clear problem addressed, or no meaningful novelty.
  2. 2Limited. Addresses a real problem but with a generic or well-trodden approach. Incremental at best.
  3. 3Moderate. Clear problem with a reasonable approach; some novelty in framing or method beyond routine application of existing tools.
  4. 4Significant. Important problem with an original approach, or identifies a neglected problem area. A valuable contribution others could build on.
  5. 5Exceptional. Tackles a critical AI safety problem with a genuinely novel approach, or opens a new research direction. Clear theory of change. You'd be excited to share this with researchers in the area.

How sound are methodology, implementation, and findings?

Scoring guide
  1. 1Seriously flawed. Methodology broken, results uninterpretable, or implementation doesn't work.
  2. 2Weak. Approach has significant gaps: missing validation, flawed experimental design, or incomplete implementation.
  3. 3Competent. Technically solid given the short duration. Methodology makes sense, results are interpretable, limitations acknowledged, work builds toward clear conclusions.
  4. 4Strong. Thorough methodology with convincing validation. Results clearly support conclusions. Immediately useful for future work.
  5. 5Exceptional. Ambitious scope executed rigorously. Surprising findings, novel methods, or unusually robust validation.

How clearly are work, findings, and impact potential communicated?

Scoring guide
  1. 1Incomprehensible. Cannot determine what the project is actually claiming or doing.
  2. 2Hard to follow. Key information buried, missing, or diluted by excessive length. Significant effort to extract main points.
  3. 3Clear enough. Can understand the problem, approach, and results without undue effort. Core content clearly present: problem, method, findings, limitations.
  4. 4Well presented. Easy to follow, well-structured, appropriate level of detail. Target audience would get it quickly.
  5. 5Exceptionally clear. A pleasure to read. Complex ideas made accessible. Could serve as a model for how to present this type of work.

  1. Weak research methodology and not enough detail about the process, the results and how the results were analysed.

Cite this project

@misc{mak2026operationredfrontlinev3beta,
  title = {{OPERATION\_RED-FRONTLINE\_V3-Beta}},
  author = {Jason Mak and Mak Yat Long},
  year = {2026},
  month = may,
  note = {Submitted to The Secure Program Synthesis Hackathon, an Apart Research Sprint},
  howpublished = {\url{https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/operationredfrontlinev3beta-xexb}},
  url = {https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/operationredfrontlinev3beta-xexb}
}

Build something like this at the next Sprint

AI Collusion Research Sprint · Oct 23 - 25, 2026