CVE-Bench
Real-world web-application CVEs in sandboxed services. Agent is scored on reaching predefined attack objectives.
40 critical-severity CVEs in live web applications, released 31 March 2025 with reference exploits on request. ICML 2025 spotlight. Apache 2.0. Superseded by CVE-Bench 2, whose grader changed the evaluation criteria.
In the authors’ words
Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly capable of autonomously conducting cyberattacks, posing significant threats to existing applications. This growing risk highlights the urgent need for a real-world benchmark to evaluate the ability of LLM agents to exploit web application vulnerabilities. However, existing benchmarks fall short as they are limited to abstracted Capture the Flag competitions or lack comprehensive coverage. Building a benchmark for real-world vulnerabilities involves both specialized expertise to reproduce exploits and a systematic approach to evaluating unpredictable threats. To address this challenge, we introduce CVE-Bench, a real-world cybersecurity benchmark based on critical-severity Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures. In CVE-Bench, we design a sandbox framework that enables LLM agents to exploit vulnerable web applications in scenarios that mimic real-world conditions, while also providing effective evaluation of their exploits. Our evaluation shows that the state-of-the-art agent framework can resolve up to 13% of vulnerabilities.
- Level
- Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
- Scored
- Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
- Answers
- Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.
GPT-5.6 Sol leads with 94.1%
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.
- 1 GPT-5.6 Sol 94.1%
- 2 GPT-5.5 Pro 93.1%
- 3 GPT-5.5 93.1%
- 4 GPT-5.5 Instant 90.2%
- 5 GPT-5.3 Codex 90%
- 6 GPT-5.2 Codex 87%
- 7 GPT-5.4 86.3%
- 8 GPT-5.4 Mini 83.3%
- 9 GPT-5.6 Luna 82.3%
- 10 GPT-5.1-Codex-Max 80%
- 11 GPT-5.2 69%
- 12 Grok 4.6 39.8%
- 13 Grok 4.7 36.6%
- 14
MAI-Cyber-1-Flash 31.4%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 94.1% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | GPT-5.5 Pro | 93.1% | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 3 | GPT-5.5 | 93.1% | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 4 | GPT-5.5 Instant | 90.2% | May 2026 | Model card | |
| 5 | GPT-5.3 Codex | 90% | Feb 2026 | Model card | |
| 6 | GPT-5.2 Codex | 87% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 7 | GPT-5.4 | 86.3% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 8 | GPT-5.4 Mini | 83.3% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 9 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 82.3% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 10 | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max | 80% | Nov 2025 | Model card | |
| 11 | GPT-5.2 | 69% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 12 | Grok 4.6 | 39.8% | Aug 2026 | Model card | |
| 13 | Grok 4.7 | 36.6% | Sep 2026 | Model card | |
| 14 | | 31.4% | Jul 2026 | Model card |
5 models have held number one since its release in Mar 2025
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
The best score passed 85% in Dec 2025
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.
20 system cards report it, from 3 labs
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 Sep 2026 | Grok 4.7 model card | 36.6 | CVE-Bench, reward, xhigh, Grok Build harness (6.2 table). High = 37.7% | Cyber risk |
| 12 Aug 2026 | Grok 4.6 model card | 39.8 | CVE-Bench, reward, high, without safeguards (7.2 table) | Cyber risk |
| 6 Aug 2026 | GPT-5.6 Sol system card addendum | 94.1 | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1, representative checkpoint, printed chart label (Figure 8, 7.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 6 Aug 2026 | GPT-5.6 Luna system card addendum | 82.3 | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1, representative checkpoint, printed chart label (Figure 8, 7.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 27 Jul 2026 | | 31.4 | CVEBench, model-only terminal harness, printed 0.314, version not stated (External Cyber Benchmark Results) | Cyber risk |
| 9 Jul 2026 | GPT-5.6 Terra system card | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1 by output tokens, chart without printed numbers (Figure 32, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk | |
| 9 Jul 2026 | GPT-5.6 Sol system card | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1 by output tokens, chart without printed numbers (Figure 32, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk | |
| 9 Jul 2026 | GPT-5.6 Luna system card | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1 by output tokens, chart without printed numbers (Figure 32, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk | |
| 25 Jun 2026 | GPT-5.6 Terra system card | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1 by output tokens, chart without printed numbers (Figure 32, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk | |
| 25 Jun 2026 | GPT-5.6 Sol system card | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1 by output tokens, chart without printed numbers (Figure 32, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk | |
| 25 Jun 2026 | GPT-5.6 Luna system card | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1 by output tokens, chart without printed numbers (Figure 32, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk | |
| 4 May 2026 | GPT-5.5 Instant system card | 90.2 | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1, printed chart label (Figure 8, 8.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 23 Apr 2026 | GPT-5.5 system card | 93.1 | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1, printed chart label (Figure 17, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 23 Apr 2026 | GPT-5.5 Pro system card | 93.1 | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1, GPT-5.5 Pro, printed chart label (Figure 17, 9.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 17 Mar 2026 | GPT-5.4 Mini system card | 83.3 | CVE-Bench, pass@1 (Table 19) | Cyber risk |
| 5 Mar 2026 | GPT-5.4 system card | 86.3 | CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1, printed chart label (Figure 13, 5.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 5 Feb 2026 | GPT-5.3 Codex system card | 90 | CVEBench blind 0-day, pass@1, 34 of 40 challenges (Figure 6, 5.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 18 Dec 2025 | GPT-5.2 Codex system card addendum | 87 | CVEBench blind 0day, CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1 over 3 rollouts, printed chart label (Figure 6, 5.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
| 11 Dec 2025 | GPT-5.2 system card addendum | 69 | CVEBench blind 0day, gpt-5.2 no browsing, 34 of 40 challenges, printed chart label (Figure 10) | Cyber risk |
| 18 Nov 2025 | GPT-5.1-Codex-Max system card | 80 | CVEBench blind 0day, CVE-Bench v1.0, 34 of 40 challenges, zero-day prompt, pass@1, printed chart label (Figure 7, 5.1.2.2) | Cyber risk |
Versions
More in Cybersecurity
- ExploitGym In use 869 real-vulnerability exploit-development tasks (userspace, V8, Linux kernel). Success means capturing a flag through the intended vulnerability. GPT-6 Astra 42.4%
- ExploitBench In use 41 recent V8 JavaScript-engine N-day vulnerabilities. Progress measured by 16 grader-verified capability flags across five tiers. GPT-6 Astra 100%
- CWE-bench In use Agents audit a repository and write a patch for a security flaw, without being told where the bug is. Covers six programming languages.
Gemini 4 Carbon 71%
- Real-world vulnerability discovery In use Agents search popular open-source codebases to rediscover about 1,200 recent confirmed vulnerabilities across many languages. Reports share discovered.
Gemini 4 Argon 86%
- Artificial Analysis Cyber Index In use Agents do enterprise cyber defense tasks from three benchmarks, CWE-Bench-AA, DeepsecBench-AA and CyberGym-E2E-AA, combined into one success rate.
Mistral Large 4 (Le Chonk, open weights) 51%
- Big Sleep Evaluation (Google) In use Agents search large real codebases such as Chrome and Safari for critical, hard to find vulnerabilities. Scored by pass@1 success rate, run without safety guardrails.
Gemini 3.5 Flash Cyber 72%