Skip to content

Watcher backlog triage (2026-10): 47 closed, rulings needed on benchmarks and 31 CVE candidates #324

Open

Description

@emmanuelgjr

Summary

On 2026-10-28, the 98 open automated-watch issues (opened 2026-10-05 → 10-26) were routed against docs/TRIAGE_RULES.md. Full arXiv abstracts and NVD records were read for every item.

No risk mapping, severity or control failure is proposed here (C4).

Decisions needed

  1. Benchmarks (7). Rule 3 is ratified, so these can go into evals/EXTERNAL_BENCHMARKS.md with the OWASP column marked DRAFT. None of the abstracts states a release or licence, so each row would record "not released" or "none stated" unless the release is found. Recommend: catalogue all 7 in one PR.
  2. Blended (2): [new-research] arXiv:2610.13227 — Understanding and Mitigating Cross-Session Attacks via Persistent Artifacts in A #228 SkillRelayBench and [new-research] arXiv:2610.23109 — Trojan Horse: Automated Repository Poisoning against Coding Agents #283 TrojanBench. Triage: catalogue EvoRiskBench, PAGE and STEER-Bench (#196, #194, #198) #222 records the precedent for [new-research] arXiv:2610.03434 — Persona Guardrail: A Production-Grade Defense Framework for Agentic Systems #194 and [new-research] arXiv:2610.03089 — Securing Computer-Use Agents Against Branch Steering Attacks #198: when a defense paper's secondary contribution is a named benchmark, catalogue it and name the authors' defense. Recommend: apply the same precedent once Triage: catalogue EvoRiskBench, PAGE and STEER-Bench (#196, #194, #198) #222 merges.
  3. CVE incident candidates (31 across 5 products).
    • Is Docling GenAI tooling? It calls itself a document parser for the generative AI ecosystem, but its 10 flaws are generic parsing bugs.
    • One record per CVE, or one per product advisory batch? vLLM has 9 CVEs and Pydantic AI has 10.
    • Recommend: one record per product per disclosure batch, citing every CVE id. Docling is included only if you rule it is GenAI tooling.
  4. Needs a ruling (7). These are in the table below. Each states the conflict.

Rule 3 — benchmark catalogue candidates (7)

Issue Target Evidence
#226 APEX-Harm Introduces APEX-Harm, "a benchmark for evaluating prompt and script injection against long-horizon agents", 180 task instances per model across six attack categories.
#279 MobileInject Introduces MobileInject, "the first benchmark for evaluating mobile agents against multimodal injection attacks", with 108 executable risk instances across 11 scenarios.
#280 MobileJailBench Presents MobileJailBench, "the first evolving jailbreak benchmark for mobile agents", 520 tasks across 14 risk categories.
#300 NTBench Introduces NTBench, the Near-Target Benchmark for prompt injection that seeks plausible-but-incorrect or harmful outcomes, built on legitimate tasks from existing datasets.
#310 AgentPhishing Introduces AgentPhishing, "a benchmark for evaluating whether persuasive phishing attacks can evade detection and induce LLM email agents to comply", evaluated on nine agents (also contributes the PhishOpt attack).
#311 AfterDeleteBench Introduces AfterDeleteBench, "a controlled behavioral audit" of post-deletion information persistence in LLM agent memory.
#315 Omni-UBench Presents Omni-UBench, a framework for omni-modal guardrail assessment curating "over 183k samples drawn from 35+ heterogeneous sources" with safety labels.

Blended — defense/attack paper that also introduces a named benchmark (2)

Issue Target Evidence
#228 SkillRelayBench Characterises cross-session skill attacks, constructs SkillRelayBench (270 adversarial cases) and proposes the SkillRelayGuard defense; defense paper with a named benchmark as a secondary contribution.
#283 TrojanBench Primary contribution is TrojanForge, an automated repository-poisoning attack framework; also constructs TrojanBench (384 poisoned repositories) as a secondary contribution.

Needs a ruling (7)

Issue Target Evidence
#225 Fuzzing framework (Rule 1) whose evaluation found verified CWE-class bugs in 343 tools across 118 of 273 real open-source MCP servers; conflicts with worked examples INC-114 and INC-126, where MCP-server mass-scan findings were recorded as incidents.
#232 INC-137 Self-described "conceptual research paper" proposing the PASAC framework (Rule 1), but it is a comparative case study of real 2026 incidents, including OpenAI agents compromising Hugging Face production (already INC-137) plus Anthropic and Gemini out-of-scope cases with no record; Rule 1 vs Rule 2 conflict.
#241 Primarily an architecture (Rule 1) for investigating candidate autonomous-agent activity, but reports public traces resolved to "specific Census requests from 16 - 17 June"; unclear whether this documents a real-world GenAI event (no incident record found), and the authors state traces "do not establish organizational attribution".
#254 JeecgBoot is a general low-code platform; the flaw is missing authorization in its AIRAG promptExperiment handler that lets any user run LLM evaluation runs, so whether it counts as GenAI tooling is a scope call (versioned, VulnCheck advisory).
#276 ABF-Bench Introduces ABF-Bench, a verifiable benchmark for agentic blockchain forensics (Rule 3 on its face), but it measures fund-tracing capability, not a GenAI security risk, so it may fall outside EXTERNAL_BENCHMARKS.md scope.
#302 Detection technique (Rule 1) whose evaluation on 13,598 real ClawHub skills found 612 insecure compositions; conflicts with worked examples INC-118/INC-121, where scans of live skill registries were recorded as incidents.
#319 Goose terminal integration sends unredacted shell history to LLM providers; Red Hat advisory exists, but neither NVD nor Red Hat names an affected Goose version (Red Hat lists only the RHEL 9/10 goose package as Affected).

CVE incident candidates (31)

Each names an affected version and has a citable advisory per NVD. No incident record cites any of these CVE ids yet.

Product Issues CVEs CNA
vLLM #245, #246, #247, #248, #249, #250, #251, #252, #253 9 security-advisories@github.com
Docling #255, #256, #257, #258, #259, #260, #261, #262, #263, #264 10 security-advisories@github.com
Pydantic AI #265, #266, #267, #268, #269, #270, #271, #272, #273, #274 10 security-advisories@github.com
9router (Hermes Agent settings endpoint) #275 1 disclosure@vulncheck.com
MLflow #320 1 security-advisories@github.com

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    triage:needs-humanWatch finding whose relevance is a maintainer call

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions