CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Jun 26, 2026

CyberChainBench: Can AI Agents Secure Smart Contracts Against Real-World On-Chain Vulnerabilities?

arXiv Security Archived Jun 26, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2606.26216v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present CyberChainBench, a benchmark for evaluating LLM-based agents on smart contract security across three complementary tasks: vulnerability detection, exploit generation, and patch synthesis. Built from 541 real-world exploit incidents from DeFiHackLabs spanning 9 EVM chains, the benchmark provides end-to-end on-chain evaluation where agents interact with historical blockchain state through isolated evaluation environments orchestrated by Ha

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Cryptography and Security [Submitted on 24 Jun 2026] CyberChainBench: Can AI Agents Secure Smart Contracts Against Real-World On-Chain Vulnerabilities? Jintao Huang, Fengqing Jiang, Radha Poovendran, Zhiqiang Lin We present CyberChainBench, a benchmark for evaluating LLM-based agents on smart contract security across three complementary tasks: vulnerability detection, exploit generation, and patch synthesis. Built from 541 real-world exploit incidents from DeFiHackLabs spanning 9 EVM chains, the benchmark provides end-to-end on-chain evaluation where agents interact with historical blockchain state through isolated evaluation environments orchestrated by Harbor, using tools to read code, trace transactions, and validate exploits on mainnet forks. Each case is anchored to a specific block and includes structured ground truth covering vulnerability type, localization, and attacker profit. Exploits are graded by economic impact on historical forks; patches are validated by replaying historical attacks and legitimate transactions as fail-to-pass test oracles on a proxy-upgradeable subset. We define a five-type vulnerability taxonomy and evaluate multiple agent--model configurations. Results reveal a clear difficulty gradient: the best configuration scores 37.5% on detection, 43.7% on exploitation, but only 23.4% on patching, with the top agent (Codex with GPT-5.5) realizing $57.4M in total exploit profit across the 200-case exploit set at a cost of $2.39 per case. Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2606.26216 [cs.CR]   (or arXiv:2606.26216v1 [cs.CR] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.26216 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Jintao Huang [view email] [v1] Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:58:16 UTC (3,257 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.CR < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-06 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI 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
    Jun 26, 2026
    Archived
    Jun 26, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗