SRE-Bench
Software reverse engineering without source: 262 binary instances from 19 private programs, each with six graded objectives.
Programs are private to stay contamination-free.
In the authors’ words
AI agents are rapidly improving in cybersecurity when source code is available, yet much of the software most consequential to security, including malware, firmware, and proprietary applications, exists only as binaries. Analyzing such software requires reverse engineering (RE): recovering program semantics before analysis can proceed. Evaluating agentic RE poses a fundamental challenge: realistic benchmark instances must (1) be absent from LLMs' training data to prevent shortcuts by memorization, and (2) reflect the scale and anti-analysis protections of real-world binaries. We introduce SRE-Bench, the first realistic, contamination-free RE benchmark. Built from scratch by RE experts with over 5,000 expert hours, SRE-Bench comprises 19 private, real-world-scale programs averaging 16.9K lines of code. We further developed 44 in-house anti-analysis mechanisms, yielding 262 binary instances and 1,572 deterministically graded tasks. We evaluated 13 agentic settings across 11 models: eight in public-facing settings and five in internal unconstrained settings with cyber safeguards disabled and no budget cap. Realistic RE remains challenging for frontier agents: GPT-5.6-Sol and Claude-Fable-5.1, despite strong source-code security capabilities, fully solve only 31.5% and 26.9% of graded instances, suggesting that success in source-code security does not translate into effective binary analysis. Without a budget cap and safety guard, GPT-6-Astra achieves a near-perfect pass@4 score, yet reliably identifying the correct candidate remains difficult. Agents are largely insensitive to compiler optimization and static linking, and ablations confirm that both contamination control and realistic scale are essential to understanding agents' RE capability. These findings highlight RE as a distinct frontier for agentic cybersecurity and establish SRE-Bench as a rigorous testbed for measuring progress.
- 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-6 Astra leads with 56.9%
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Every run is in the next chart. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.
- 56.9 GPT-6 Astra
- 50.8 GPT-6.1 Sol
- 44.3
Gemini 4 Argon
- 33.6 Claude Opus 5.5
- 31.7 Daybreak Blue
- 30.5 GPT-5.6 Sol
- 30.5 GPT-6 Sol
- 30.1 Claude Sonnet 5.5
- 22.9 Claude Fable 5.1
- 21.8 Claude Opus 5.5 (CVP)
- 12.2 Claude Opus 5
- 11.8
Muse Wonder Full
- 11.1
Gemini 3.8 Flash
- 9.54 GPT-5.6 Terra
- 9.16 GLM-5.3
- 5.72 Claude Haiku 5.5
- 4.58
Gemini 3.7 Flash
- 4.20 MiMo-V2.6 Flash
- 3.82 GPT-5.5
- 3.82
Muse Spark 1.3
- 3.82 Grok 4.7
- 3.05 MiMo-V2.6 Pro
- 2.67 GPT-6 Luna
- 2.29
Tencent Hy4 preview
- 1.91
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
- 1.53 GPT-5.6 Luna
- 0.76 Grok 4.5
- 0.76 GLM-5.3-Flash
- 0.76
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 0.38 Claude Sonnet 5
- 0.38
Step 5 Preview
- 0.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 0.0 GLM-5.2
- 0.0
Inkling
- 0.0
Muse Spark 1.2
- 1 GPT-6 Astra 56.9%
- 2 GPT-6.1 Sol 50.8%
- 3
Gemini 4 Argon 44.3%
- 4 Claude Opus 5.5 33.6%
- 5 Daybreak Blue 31.7%
- 6 GPT-5.6 Sol 30.5%
- 7 GPT-6 Sol 30.5%
- 8 Claude Sonnet 5.5 30.1%
- 9 Claude Fable 5.1 22.9%
- 10 Claude Opus 5.5 (CVP) 21.8%
- 11 Claude Opus 5 12.2%
- 12
Muse Wonder Full 11.8%
- 13
Gemini 3.8 Flash 11.1%
- 14 GPT-5.6 Terra 9.54%
- 15 GLM-5.3 9.16%
- 16 Claude Haiku 5.5 5.72%
- 17
Gemini 3.7 Flash 4.58%
- 18 MiMo-V2.6 Flash 4.20%
- 19 GPT-5.5 3.82%
- 20
Muse Spark 1.3 max 3.82%
- 21 Grok 4.7 3.82%
- 22 MiMo-V2.6 Pro 3.05%
- 23 GPT-6 Luna 2.67%
- 24
Tencent Hy4 preview 2.29%
- 25
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 1.91%
- 26 GPT-5.6 Luna 1.53%
- 27 Grok 4.5 0.76%
- 28 GLM-5.3-Flash 0.76%
- 29
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 0.76%
- 30 Claude Sonnet 5 0.38%
- 31
Step 5 Preview 0.38%
- 32
Gemini 3.1 Pro 0%
- 33 GLM-5.2 0%
- 34
Inkling 0%
- 35
Muse Spark 1.2 0%
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-6 Astra | 56.9% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | GPT-6.1 Sol | 50.8% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 44.3% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Claude Opus 5.5 | 33.6% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | Daybreak Blue | 31.7% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 6 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 30.5% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | GPT-6 Sol | 30.5% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 30.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 22.9% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Claude Opus 5.5 (CVP) | 21.8% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 11 | Claude Opus 5 | 12.2% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 11.8% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 11.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | GPT-5.6 Terra | 9.54% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | GLM-5.3 | 9.16% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | Claude Haiku 5.5 | 5.72% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 4.58% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | MiMo-V2.6 Flash | 4.20% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | GPT-5.5 | 3.82% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 3.82% | max | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | Grok 4.7 | 3.82% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 3.05% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | GPT-6 Luna | 2.67% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 24 | | 2.29% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 25 | | 1.91% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 26 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 1.53% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 27 | Grok 4.5 | 0.76% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 28 | GLM-5.3-Flash | 0.76% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 29 | | 0.76% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 30 | Claude Sonnet 5 | 0.38% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 31 | | 0.38% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 32 | | 0% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 33 | GLM-5.2 | 0% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 34 | | 0% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 35 | | 0% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 1 model in their cards. We plot every source in the charts below.
The best score, 56.9%, costs $10 a task
Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 Astra | 56.9% | $10 | |||
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 50.8% | $2.69 | |||
| | 44.3% | $30 | |||
| Claude Opus 5.5 | 33.6% | $35 | |||
| GPT-5.6 Sol | 30.5% | $43 | |||
| GPT-6 Sol | 30.5% | $21 | |||
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 30.1% | $27 | |||
| Claude Fable 5.1 | 22.9% | $32 | |||
| Claude Opus 5 | 12.2% | $24 | |||
| | 11.8% | $34 | |||
| | 11.1% | $27 | |||
| GPT-5.6 Terra | 9.54% | $31 | |||
| GLM-5.3 | 9.16% | $27 | |||
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | 5.72% | $3.14 | |||
| | 4.58% | $21 | |||
| MiMo-V2.6 Flash | 4.20% | $0.40 | |||
| GPT-5.5 | 3.82% | $18 | |||
| | max | 3.82% | $26 | ||
| Grok 4.7 | 3.82% | $65 | |||
| MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 3.05% | $0.53 | |||
| GPT-6 Luna | 2.67% | $1.55 | |||
| | 2.29% | $4.90 | |||
| | 1.91% | $5.58 | |||
| GPT-5.6 Luna | 1.53% | $3.44 | |||
| Grok 4.5 | 0.76% | $13 | |||
| GLM-5.3-Flash | 0.76% | $2.29 | |||
| | 0.76% | $0.55 | |||
| Claude Sonnet 5 | 0.38% | $18 | |||
| | 0.38% | $3.07 | |||
| | 0% | $11 | |||
| GLM-5.2 | 0% | $27 | |||
| | 0% | $2.23 | |||
| | 0% | $23 |
2 models have held number one since its release in Aug 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
The best score passed 85% in Sep 2026
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.
One system card reports it
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 Sep 2026 | GPT-6 Astra system card | 99.2 | SRE-Bench, pass@4 (pass@1 88.0%, printed chart label) (10.1.2.3, Figure 50) | Cyber risk |
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%