Explore/benchmark/Security Assessment of DeepSeek Harness with A.I.G: Evaluating Resistance to Indirect Prompt Injection
S

Zonghao Ying, Xiangfan Wu, Huiyu Wu, Xing Zheng, Huangsheng Cheng, Xiaorong Shi, Jing Guo/Security Assessment of DeepSeek Harness with A.I.G: Evaluating Resistance to Indirect Prompt InjectionUnknown

We assess indirect prompt injection in DeepSeek Harness (DSH), using AI-Infra-Guard (A.I.G) to construct tests, deliver controlled taint, execute DSH, collect traces, and judge outcomes. The study covers 14,560 controlled executions over 16 indirect-content channels, text and file carrier modes, 35 payload objectives, one unmodified baseline, and 12 attack methods. The experiment preserves DSH's agent loop, tool registry, model adapter, and session-event path; source tools and sensitive sinks are local fixtures, so attempted actions are recorded without external side effects. We evaluate each trace with a deterministic rule-based judge, \JudgeR{} (RuleJudge), and a semantic LLM-based judge, \JudgeL{} (LLMJudge). The strongest observed attack success rates are 17.0% under \JudgeL{} for fake-completion attack in text mode, 25.5% under \JudgeR{} for hidden Unicode in file mode, and 16.0% under \JudgeR{} for the skills channel in file mode. \JudgeL{} also assigns partial compliance more often than \JudgeR{} (7.3% versus 2.0%). We relate these results to DSH's treatment of tool results, additional contexts, and tool-call policy hooks, then identify controls that should sit between untrusted content and sensitive actions. Our code is available at https://github.com/Tencent/AI-Infra-Guard.

benchmark
GitHubCompare
Refreshed 11d ago
OverviewActivity52wAlternativesDocs
Stars0
Forks0
HF Downloads—30d
Last commit—
Refreshed11d ago
Project healthUnknownNo activity data.
Production readinessResearch / EarlyBest for exploration and prototyping.
Risk notesUnknown licenseVerify license before production use.
AgentHub Score
55 / 100
Composite score from 6 signals. How we score →
Active project
55Score
Growth
40C
Activity
30C
Documentation
70C+
Maturity
45C
Community
42C
Production
58C
GitHub stars · 10 days observed0 not enough history
snapshots
Repository activity · 10 days observedReal snapshots from pushed_at
inactivepushed
2026-08-192026-08-30
Practical assessment
Should you use it?

✓ Best for

  • Research and experimentation
  • Prototype development
  • Learning agentic patterns

◎ Strengths

  • Active community
  • Open source
  • Well-documented API

✕ Not ideal for

  • Untested at scale without validation
  • Teams without AI/ML expertise

⚠ Watch-outs

  • Review changelog before updating
  • Verify license for commercial use
Technical details
What's inside
Language—
License—
Sourcearxiv
Open source✗ No
Commercial use—
Docs—
Demo—

AgentHub Score

55
Score 55/100
Below average

Alternatives

R
RIFT-Bench: Dynamic Red-teaming For Agentic AI Systems
0 · benchmark
55
B
Benchmarking AI Agents for Hardware Design Automation via MCP Tool Calling
0 · benchmark
55
A
AI Slop and Hallucinations in Vulnerability Assessment: A Survey on Reasoning Failures and Trustworthy Mitigation
0 · benchmark
55
D
Designing a Robust LLM-Based Evaluation System for Agentic AI in Drug Discovery Through Human Alignment
0 · benchmark
55Compare all →

Recent activity

Latest commit ——
Indexed by AgentHub crawler11d ago
Monitor for new releasesongoing