Researcher profile

Gelei Deng

Gelei Deng contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
8topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Agent Skills in the Wild: An Empirical Study of Security Vulnerabilities at Scale

The rise of AI agent frameworks has introduced agent skills, modular packages containing instructions and executable code that dynamically extend agent capabilities. While this architecture enables powerful customization, skills execute with implicit trust and minimal vetting, creating a significant yet uncharacterized attack surface. We conduct the first large-scale empirical security analysis of this emerging ecosystem, collecting 42,447 skills from two major marketplaces and systematically analyzing 31,132 using SkillScan, a multi-stage detection framework integrating static analysis with LLM-based semantic classification. Our findings reveal pervasive security risks: 26.1% of skills contain at least one vulnerability, spanning 14 distinct patterns across four categories: prompt injection, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, and supply chain risks. Data exfiltration (13.3%) and privilege escalation (11.8%) are most prevalent, while 5.2% of skills exhibit high-severity patterns strongly suggesting malicious intent. We find that skills bundling executable scripts are 2.12x more likely to contain vulnerabilities than instruction-only skills (OR=2.12, p<0.001). Our contributions include: (1) a grounded vulnerability taxonomy derived from 8,126 vulnerable skills, (2) a validated detection methodology achieving 86.7% precision and 82.5% recall, and (3) an open dataset and detection toolkit to support future research. These results demonstrate an urgent need for capability-based permission systems and mandatory security vetting before this attack vector is further exploited.

preprint2026arXiv

Beyond Retrieval: Improving Evidence Quality for LLM-based Multimodal Fact-Checking

The increasing multimodal disinformation, where deceptive claims are reinforced through coordinated text and visual content, poses significant challenges to automated fact-checking. Recent efforts leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) for this task, capitalizing on their strong reasoning and multimodal understanding capabilities. Emerging retrieval-augmented frameworks further equip LLMs with access to open-domain external information, enabling evidence-based verification beyond their internal knowledge. Despite their promising gains, our empirical study reveals notable shortcomings in the external search coverage and evidence quality evaluation. To mitigate those limitations, we propose Aletheia, an end-to-end framework for automated multimodal fact-checking. It introduces a novel evidence retrieval strategy that improves evidence coverage and filters useless information from open-domain sources, enabling the extraction of high-quality evidence for verification. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Aletheia achieves an accuracy of 88.3% on two public multimodal disinformation datasets and 90.2% on newly emerging claims. Compared with existing evidence retrieval strategies, our approach improves verification accuracy by up to 30.8%, highlighting the critical role of evidence quality in LLM-based disinformation verification.

preprint2026arXiv

Overeager Coding Agents: Measuring Out-of-Scope Actions on Benign Tasks

Coding agents now run autonomously with shell, file, and network privileges. When a user issues a benign request, the agent sometimes does more than asked: it deletes unrelated files, wipes a stale credentials backup, or rewrites configuration the user never mentioned. We call these scope expansions overeager actions, an authorization problem distinct from capability failures, prompt injection, or sandbox escapes. We present OverEager-Gen, a benchmark dedicated to overeager behavior on benign tasks. Building it surfaces a measurement-validity issue: if a benchmark spells out the authorized scope inside the prompt, the agent stops inferring boundaries and starts pattern-matching declaration text. On Claude Code, stripping the consent declaration alone raises the overeager rate from 0.0% to 17.1% on paired scenarios (McNemar exact p = 2.4 x 10^-4). OverEager-Gen therefore certifies each scenario's discriminative power before admission via a behavioral-gradient validator, audits internal tool calls through a dual-channel stack (PATH-injected shim plus per-agent event streams), and ships byte-identical consent_kept and consent_stripped variants. OverEager-Bench contains 500 validated scenarios and ~7,500 runs across four agent products (Claude Code, OpenHands, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI) and six base models; a 50-sample re-annotation gives Cohen's kappa = 0.73 and rule-judge recall = 1.00. Stripping consent multiplies the overeager rate on every shared base model (Delta in [11.9, 17.2] pp). The framework axis dominates effect size: a permissive cluster (Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI) runs at 5.4-27.7% while the ask-to-continue framework (OpenHands) sits at 0.2-4.5% (Fisher p <= 10^-5). Within-framework base-model variance reaches 15.9 pp, indicating that model-layer alignment does not fully propagate through permissive permission gating.

preprint2026arXiv

Robust CAPTCHA Using Audio Illusions in the Era of Large Language Models: from Evaluation to Advances

CAPTCHAs are widely used by websites to block bots and spam by presenting challenges that are easy for humans but difficult for automated programs to solve. To improve accessibility, audio CAPTCHAs are designed to complement visual ones. However, the robustness of audio CAPTCHAs against advanced Large Audio Language Models (LALMs) and Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) models remains unclear. In this paper, we introduce AI-CAPTCHA, a unified framework that offers (i) an evaluation framework, ACEval, which includes advanced LALM- and ASR-based solvers, and (ii) a novel audio CAPTCHA approach, IllusionAudio, leveraging audio illusions. Through extensive evaluations of seven widely deployed audio CAPTCHAs, we show that most existing methods can be solved with high success rates by advanced LALMs and ASR models, exposing critical security weaknesses. To address these vulnerabilities, we design a new audio CAPTCHA approach, IllusionAudio, which exploits perceptual illusion cues rooted in human auditory mechanisms. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method defeats all tested LALM- and ASR-based attacks while achieving a 100% human pass rate, significantly outperforming existing audio CAPTCHA methods.

preprint2024arXiv

Digger: Detecting Copyright Content Mis-usage in Large Language Model Training

Pre-training, which utilizes extensive and varied datasets, is a critical factor in the success of Large Language Models (LLMs) across numerous applications. However, the detailed makeup of these datasets is often not disclosed, leading to concerns about data security and potential misuse. This is particularly relevant when copyrighted material, still under legal protection, is used inappropriately, either intentionally or unintentionally, infringing on the rights of the authors. In this paper, we introduce a detailed framework designed to detect and assess the presence of content from potentially copyrighted books within the training datasets of LLMs. This framework also provides a confidence estimation for the likelihood of each content sample&#39;s inclusion. To validate our approach, we conduct a series of simulated experiments, the results of which affirm the framework&#39;s effectiveness in identifying and addressing instances of content misuse in LLM training processes. Furthermore, we investigate the presence of recognizable quotes from famous literary works within these datasets. The outcomes of our study have significant implications for ensuring the ethical use of copyrighted materials in the development of LLMs, highlighting the need for more transparent and responsible data management practices in this field.

preprint2022arXiv

Morest: Model-based RESTful API Testing with Execution Feedback

RESTful APIs are arguably the most popular endpoints for accessing Web services. Blackbox testing is one of the emerging techniques for ensuring the reliability of RESTful APIs. The major challenge in testing RESTful APIs is the need for correct sequences of API operation calls for in-depth testing. To build meaningful operation call sequences, researchers have proposed techniques to learn and utilize the API dependencies based on OpenAPI specifications. However, these techniques either lack the overall awareness of how all the APIs are connected or the flexibility of adaptively fixing the learned knowledge. In this paper, we propose Morest, a model-based RESTful API testing technique that builds and maintains a dynamically updating RESTful-service Property Graph (RPG) to model the behaviors of RESTful-services and guide the call sequence generation. We empirically evaluated Morest and the results demonstrate that Morest can successfully request an average of 152.66%-232.45% more API operations, cover 26.16%-103.24% more lines of code, and detect 40.64%-215.94% more bugs than state-of-the-art techniques. In total, we applied Morest to 6 real-world projects and found 44 bugs (13 of them cannot be detected by existing approaches). Specifically, 2 of the confirmed bugs are from Bitbucket, a famous code management service with more than 6 million users.