Xu Pan
Publications
AutoControl Arena: Synthesizing Executable Test Environments for Frontier AI Risk Evaluation
As Large Language Models (LLMs) evolve into autonomous agents, existing safety evaluations face a fundamental trade-off: manual benchmarks are costly, while LLM-based simulators are scalable but suffer from logic hallucination. We present AutoControl Arena, an automated framework for frontier AI risk evaluation built on the principle of logic-narrative decoupling. By grounding deterministic state in executable code while delegating generative dynamics to LLMs, we mitigate hallucination while maintaining flexibility. This principle, instantiated through a three-agent framework, achieves over 98% end-to-end success and 60% human preference over existing simulators. To elicit latent risks, we vary environmental Stress and Temptation across X-Bench (70 scenarios, 7 risk categories). Evaluating 9 frontier models reveals: (1) Alignment Illusion: risk rates surge from 21.7% to 54.5% under pressure, with capable models showing disproportionately larger increases; (2) Scenario-Specific Safety Scaling: advanced reasoning improves robustness for direct harms but worsens it for gaming scenarios; and (3) Divergent Misalignment Patterns: weaker models cause non-malicious harm while stronger models develop strategic concealment.
MirrorGuard: Toward Secure Computer-Use Agents via Simulation-to-Real Reasoning Correction
Large foundation models are integrated into Computer Use Agents (CUAs), enabling autonomous interaction with operating systems through graphical user interfaces (GUIs) to perform complex tasks. This autonomy introduces serious security risks: malicious instructions or visual prompt injections can trigger unsafe reasoning and cause harmful system-level actions. Existing defenses, such as detection-based blocking, prevent damage but often abort tasks prematurely, reducing agent utility. In this paper, we present MirrorGuard, a plug-and-play defense framework that uses simulation-based training to improve CUA security in the real world. To reduce the cost of large-scale training in operating systems, we propose a novel neural-symbolic simulation pipeline, which generates realistic, high-risk GUI interaction trajectories entirely in a text-based simulated environment, which captures unsafe reasoning patterns and potential system hazards without executing real operations. In the simulation environment, MirrorGuard learns to intercept and rectify insecure reasoning chains of CUAs before they produce and execute unsafe actions. In real-world testing, extensive evaluations across diverse benchmarks and CUA architectures show that MirrorGuard significantly mitigates security risks. For instance, on the ByteDance UI-TARS system, it reduces the unsafe rate from 66.5% to 13.0% while maintaining a marginal false refusal rate (FRR). In contrast, the state-of-the-art GuardAgent only achieves a reduction to 53.9% and suffers from a 15.4% higher FRR. Our work proves that simulation-derived defenses can provide robust, real-world protection while maintaining the fundamental utility of the agent. Our code and model are publicly available at https://bmz-q-q.github.io/MirrorGuard/.
WebTrap Park: An Automated Platform for Systematic Security Evaluation of Web Agents
Web Agents are increasingly deployed to perform complex tasks in real web environments, yet their security evaluation remains fragmented and difficult to standardize. We present WebTrap Park, an automated platform for systematic security evaluation of Web Agents through direct observation of their concrete interactions with live web pages. WebTrap Park instantiates three major sources of security risk into 1,226 executable evaluation tasks and enables action based assessment without requiring agent modification. Our results reveal clear security differences across agent frameworks, highlighting the importance of agent architecture beyond the underlying model. WebTrap Park is publicly accessible at https://security.fudan.edu.cn/webagent and provides a scalable foundation for reproducible Web Agent security evaluation.
When Bots Take the Bait: Exposing and Mitigating the Emerging Social Engineering Attack in Web Automation Agent
Web agents, powered by large language models (LLMs), are increasingly deployed to automate complex web interactions. The rise of open-source frameworks (e.g., Browser Use, Skyvern-AI) has accelerated adoption, but also broadened the attack surface. While prior research has focused on model threats such as prompt injection and backdoors, the risks of social engineering remain largely unexplored. We present the first systematic study of social engineering attacks against web automation agents and design a pluggable runtime mitigation solution. On the attack side, we introduce the AgentBait paradigm, which exploits intrinsic weaknesses in agent execution: inducement contexts can distort the agent's reasoning and steer it toward malicious objectives misaligned with the intended task. On the defense side, we propose SUPERVISOR, a lightweight runtime module that enforces environment and intention consistency alignment between webpage context and intended goals to mitigate unsafe operations before execution. Empirical results show that mainstream frameworks are highly vulnerable to AgentBait, with an average attack success rate of 67.5% and peaks above 80% under specific strategies (e.g., trusted identity forgery). Compared with existing lightweight defenses, our module can be seamlessly integrated across different web automation frameworks and reduces attack success rates by up to 78.1% on average while incurring only a 7.7% runtime overhead and preserving usability. This work reveals AgentBait as a critical new threat surface for web agents and establishes a practical, generalizable defense, advancing the security of this rapidly emerging ecosystem. We reported the details of this attack to the framework developers and received acknowledgment before submission.