CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 22, 2026

Malicious ML Model Detection by Learning Dynamic Behaviors

arXiv Security Archived Apr 22, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.19438v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pre-trained machine learning models (PTMs) are commonly provided via Model Hubs (e.g., Hugging Face) in standard formats like Pickles to facilitate accessibility and reuse. However, this ML supply chain setting is susceptible to malicious attacks that are capable of executing arbitrary code on trusted user environments, e.g., during model loading. To detect malicious PTMs, state-of-the-art detectors (e.g., PickleScan) rely on rules, heuristics, or

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Cryptography and Security [Submitted on 21 Apr 2026] Malicious ML Model Detection by Learning Dynamic Behaviors Sarang Nambiar, Dhruv Pradhan, Ezekiel Soremekun Pre-trained machine learning models (PTMs) are commonly provided via Model Hubs (e.g., Hugging Face) in standard formats like Pickles to facilitate accessibility and reuse. However, this ML supply chain setting is susceptible to malicious attacks that are capable of executing arbitrary code on trusted user environments, e.g., during model loading. To detect malicious PTMs, state-of-the-art detectors (e.g., PickleScan) rely on rules, heuristics, or static analysis, but ignore runtime model behaviors. Consequently, they either miss malicious models due to under-approximation (blacklisting) or miscategorize benign models due to over-approximation (static analysis or whitelisting). To address this challenge, we propose a novel technique (DynaHug) which detects malicious PTMs by learning the behavior of benign PTMs using dynamic analysis and machine learning (ML). DynaHug trains an ML classifier (one-class SVM (OCSVM)) on the runtime behaviours of task-specific benign models. We evaluate DynaHug using over 25,000 benign and malicious PTMs from different sources including Hugging Face and MalHug. We also compare DynaHug to several state-of-the-art detectors including static, dynamic and LLM-based detectors. Results show that DynaHug is up to 44% more effective than existing baselines in terms of F1-score. Our ablation study demonstrates that our design decisions (dynamic analysis, OCSVM, clustering) contribute positively to DynaHug's effectiveness. Comments: Currently under review at the International Symposium on Research in Attacks, Intrusions and Defenses 2026 Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Software Engineering (cs.SE) Cite as: arXiv:2604.19438 [cs.CR]   (or arXiv:2604.19438v1 [cs.CR] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.19438 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Sarang Nambiar [view email] [v1] Tue, 21 Apr 2026 13:12:42 UTC (1,026 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.CR < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs cs.SE References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv Security
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 22, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 22, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗