Parent: LLM Vulnerability Scanner Feature Parity with Garak, Giskard, CyberSecEval
まだ誰も着手していません。
- 主要言語
- Python
- スター
- 4.5k
- フォーク
- 893
- 平均マージ
- 3日 50分
- マージ済み PR(30日)
- 165
説明
TLDR; We want help creating issues where Garak, Giskard, or CyberSecEval support an attack scenario where PyRIT doesn't support it.
#### Background
Other tools like Garak, Giskard, and CyberSecEval have different use cases from PyRIT, but there is overlap as well. If there is an attack in one of these other platforms, we probably want to support it also and would love issues being created so we can track this (or clarify if it already exists/improve our docs).
[This](https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16527) paper tackles a really difficult problem, and that's comparing these tools (and PyRIT). When I was looking, some of the things I noticed that it mentioned PyRIT was lacking were:
- Lack of multi-language support (I think we actually have this as a converter)
- Lack of GCG (we have this as an auxiliary module)
- Dan, AutoDan, etc (I think we have support for all of this. We certainly have DAN and ways to modify those prompts with GPTFuzz - but we would love to know what we're missing)
- Insecure Coding Test (we don't have this, but it would be an easy scorer to write!)
And there might be more that I missed!
So as an example of issues we'd like, all of the above are good to open. Even if we think we support them (like in the multi-language case) we can dive into specifics to make sure we're not missing anything, and potentially improve documentation so it's more obvious these scenarios are supported.
#### Describe the solution you'd like
Please open follow-up sub-issues with any features you notice or find in these other tools that PyRIT doesn't have! That way we can track them. Also, we would love community to tackle any of these also, but it still can be helpful to open an issue so we can help guide :D
コントリビューションガイド
このリポジトリのコントリビューションガイドは索引されていません
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
調査の方向性
実装ファイル、テスト、またはエントリーポイントは特定されていません。まず、Garak、Giskard、CyberSecEval がサポートする攻撃シナリオと、PyRIT の文書化された機能を比較し、その後、不足している 1 つのシナリオに焦点を絞ったフォローアップ issue を作成してください。シナリオの実装またはドキュメントのスコープが明確になれば完了です。
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
評価
- 技術スタック
- python
- 領域
- security
- issue の種類
- 機能追加
- 難易度
- 5/5
- 見積もり時間
- 1週間以上
- 活発さ
- 静か
- 明瞭さ
- 説明が足りない
- 初心者へのやさしさ
- 25/100