Multimodal-SEA: Benchmarking AI Agent Security under Multimodal Social Engineering Attacks
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-core · Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Personal AI agents face social engineering attacks supported by forged multimodal content, but existing evaluations mainly focus on text-based dialogue, leaving their intrinsic security under such attacks insufficiently studied. We introduce Multimodal-SEA, an interactive benchmark comprising 608 expert-designed tasks grounded in real-world fraud cases, covering 14 domains and 152 attack scenarios with prepared multimodal content. The tasks span four difficulty levels and reflect the distinct social and cultural contexts of Chinese and English environments. Agents inspect content, verify requests, and execute actions in simulated applications, with attack outcomes grounded in verifiable tool execution logs. To enable controlled red teaming of personal agents, we design a multimodal attack harness that integrates task information, attack progression control, and multimodal content construction to evaluate their intrinsic security against adaptive social engineering attacks in simulated environments. Evaluating seven widely used multimodal models across six dimensions reveals that all are vulnerable, with attack success rates of 7.1% to 34.5%. Adding multimodal content increases attack success from 19.9% to 29.2%, despite increased proactive verification coverage. Stronger safety instructions reduce attack success without improving recognition of deceptive multimodal content, while lower attack success rates for some models accompany excessive refusal of legitimate requests.
Results and benchmarks
Personal AI agents face social engineering attacks supported by forged multimodal content, but existing evaluations mainly focus on text-based dialogue, leaving their intrinsic security under such attacks insufficiently studied.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 3 refs, 3 links.
Utility signals: depth 65/100, grounding 75/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No maintained paper-verified implementation was found; start with the closest related repositories below.
- Compare repo methods against the paper equations/algorithm before trusting metrics.
- Create a minimal baseline implementation from the paper and use adjacent repos as references.
Time to first repro: a few days
wuyoscar/AISafetyHot is the closest maintained adjacent implementation (Matched via arXiv identifier search). It is not paper-verified; validate algorithm and evaluation setup against the paper before trusting reported metrics. Community adoption signal: 2114 GitHub stars.
- Adjacent implementations are not paper-verified
- Recommended repository is adjacent and not paper-verified.
- Adjacent implementation match confidence is low.
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
Closest related implementations
These are not paper-verified. Use them as reference points when no direct implementation is available.
- wuyoscar/AISafetyHot Adjacent · Confidence: Low · 2,114 stars
Matched via arXiv identifier search
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- xingaorpw/paper-radar
Confidence: Low · 0 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Instruction tuning, Agentic tool use
Methods
Transformer, Agentic systems
Domains
Large Language Models, AI Agents
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.