Explore/agent app/Towards Cybersecurity SuperIntelligence (CSI): What's the best harness for cybersecurity?
T

Víctor Mayoral-Vilches, Francesco Balassone, María Sanz-Gómez, Paul Zabalegui Landa, Daniel Sánchez Prieto, Marina Oteiza Álvarez, Davide Quarta, Martin Pinzger/Towards Cybersecurity SuperIntelligence (CSI): What's the best harness for cybersecurity?Unknown

What is the best harness for cybersecurity AI? Cybersecurity systems are converging on a single execution scaffold per agent, an iterative shell loop driven by a Large Language Model (LLM). However, scaffolds are not interchangeable, rarely interoperable, and no single scaffold dominates across all challenge types. In our path towards researching Cybersecurity SuperIntelligence (CSI), we present a meta-scaffold that unifies heterogeneous agent harnesses under a common orchestration layer, enabling any LLM-driven scaffold to be deployed, benchmarked, and composed within the same infrastructure. Using CSI, we benchmark five scaffolds (CSI::Claude, CSI::Codex, CSI::GCAI, CSI::Mistral, CSI::CAI) on the 33 cybench challenges, holding the model fixed at alias2-mini. The best individual scaffolds solve 15/33 (45.5%); the four-scaffold union solves 17/33 (51.5%), with the fifth (CSI::Mistral, 10/33) contributing one exclusive solve. We find that no single scaffold is the best harness: it is the combination of structurally heterogeneous scaffolds that yields the highest coverage. We validate this through CSI's blackboard-based multi-agent architecture, in which scaffold-specialised agents run in parallel and exchange intermediate findings via a shared substrate (a blackboard). The blackboard solves 19/33 (57.6%), a 27% relative gain over CSI::Claude, one of the best individual scaffolds (15/33, 45.5%), 25% faster (20.2 h vs. 26.8 h), at comparable cost ($5,480 vs. $5,122).

agent app
GitHubCompare
Refreshed 20h ago
OverviewActivity52wAlternativesDocs
Stars0
Forks0
HF Downloads—30d
Last commit—
Refreshed20h ago
Project healthUnknownNo activity data.
Production readinessResearch / EarlyBest for exploration and prototyping.
Risk notesUnknown licenseVerify license before production use.
AgentHub Score
48 / 100
Composite score from 6 signals. How we score →
Active project
48Score
Growth
40C
Activity
30C
Documentation
70C+
Maturity
45C
Community
42C
Production
58C
GitHub stars · 90 days0 +0.0%
30d90d1y
latest release
Commit activity · 52 weeksActive contributor activity
LowHigh
JunSepDecMarNow
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

48
Score 48/100
Below average

Alternatives

C
crewai
26.1k · Multi-Agent
87
A
autogen
42.7k · Multi-Agent
71
S
smolagents
11.2k · Coding
84
O
openai-agents-python
9.4k · Multi-Agent
81
Compare all →

Recent activity

Latest commit ——
Indexed by AgentHub crawler20h ago
Monitor for new releasesongoing