Meta agentic cyber misuse refusal
Muse Spark 1.1 0.70% leads since Jul 2026 Only in system cards Models run multi-step cyber tasks with tool access while an adaptive attacker tries to steer them to a malicious goal. Reports attack success rate.
In-house Meta refusal evaluation. The prompts are not public.
- Level
- Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
- Scored
- Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
- Answers
- Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.
Muse Spark 1.1 leads with 0.70% among models released by Sep 2026
Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.
The newest model with a score here came out in Sep 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 16 more
- 1 Muse Spark 1.1 0.70%
- 2 Muse Spark 2.40%
- 3 Muse Spark 1.3 2.80%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Muse Spark 1.1 | 0.70% | Jul 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | Muse Spark | 2.40% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 3 | Muse Spark 1.3 | 2.80% | Oct 2026 | Model card |
2 models have held number one since 2023
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Labs report it only in system cards
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.
3 system cards report it, from 1 lab
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 Oct 2026 | Muse Spark 1.3 system card | 2.8 | Agentic Cyber Misuse ASR with adaptive attacker, Muse Spark 1.3 (API) (Table 2, Figure 11) | Cyber risk |
| 9 Jul 2026 | Muse Spark 1.1 system card | 0.7 | Agentic cyber misuse ASR, Muse Spark 1.1 model-level (Figure 15). With system defenses 0.0 | Cyber risk |
| 12 Jun 2026 | Muse Spark system card | 2.4 | Agentic Cybermisuse ASR (Table 2, Figure 33) | Robustness |
More in Safety and alignment
- FORTRESS In use Paired adversarial and benign national-security misuse prompts. Rubric-graded risk score on adversarial and over-refusal score on benign prompts. Claude Opus 5.5 5.78%
- StrongREJECT In use Forbidden-prompt jailbreak benchmark with a rubric grader that scores how useful a non-refusal actually is.
Inkling 98.6% - AgentDojo In use Agents do tool-use tasks while tools and data carry prompt injections. Attack success rate counts hijacked runs. Grok 4 Fast 0%
- MASK In use Measures whether a model contradicts its own elicited beliefs under pressure to lie. Honesty separated from accuracy. Muse Spark Open 98.1%
- Gray Swan IPI Arena benchmark In use Indirect prompt-injection attacks from public red-teaming competitions replayed on tool, coding and browser agents. Attack success rate at k attempts. GPT-6 Astra 8.50%
- Agentic misalignment suite (Anthropic) In use Agents in simulated company settings face threats or goal conflicts that invite blackmail, leaking or sabotage. Score is the misaligned action rate. Claude Sonnet 4.5 0%