evilrobots.lol / tech / evaluator record

Gray Swan

What it was engaged to test, on what terms, what it found in the document's own words, and what happened afterwards. Every line is a record; every record links to the document it was read from.

▣ THE RECORD for-profit Security and red-team vendors STORE 2026-10-23
  • Foundednot stated
  • HQPittsburgh
  • Registry idnone cited (company)
  • TestsAdversarial red teaming; also sells filters.
  • Money, as the roster puts itPrivate company.
  • Filesdossier · observatory, sliced to it · graph
Labs tested
OpenAI Anthropic Google DeepMind Meta
Models
Fable 5 / Mythos 5Fable 5.1GPT-6 AstraGemini 4 ArgonHaikuMuse SparkMythos PreviewOpus 4.6Opus 4.8Opus 5Opus 5.5Sonnet 5.5
Span of engagements
February 2026 – 7 October 2026
Terms and findings
7 of 12 documents state a term · 4 quote a finding
Money in, US dollars, stated single-recipient rows
no stated figure 3 in · 0 outfrom UK DSIT
Seats, by side
evaluator 3 3 people: Dan Hendrycks, Matt Fredrikson, Zico Kolter
Afterwards
incident 2

Each count is the number of store records that name this evaluator. An engagement is one lab document naming it for one model; an outcome is an event on the record afterwards; the money, seats and moves are the observatory's rows filtered to it. A cell that cannot be filled says not stated, and each table ends with how many of its rows state each field.

▣ SLICE 20 / 20 records
Lab
Model
Engagement
Terms
Outcome
Funder
Person
year, month or day

Filters combine: any of the values ticked within a dimension, all of the dimensions at once. A table that has no column for a dimension you have set says so instead of showing rows that cannot match. The address bar carries the slice.

What it was engaged to test 12 engagements, OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, Meta

In date order, each from the lab document that names the evaluator. Under each: the four terms that document states (access, model stage, publication, payment) and the finding in its words. A term the document is silent on reads not stated; the tags beside the terms are read off their words and are what the console filters on.

    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated

    Finding: not stated in the document

    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated

    Finding: not stated in the document

    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated
    Finding, in the document's words"On the third-party GraySwan ART benchmark (Zou et al., 2025), Muse Spark currently shows greater sensitivity to injection than the other models GraySwan evaluated"
    • Access window"a one week bug-bounty program hosted with Gray Swan"
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated

    Finding: not stated in the document

    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Payment"GraySwan and Anthropic are running an ongoing bug bounty in which we reward red-teamers for developing jailbreaks for our safeguards"

    Finding: not stated in the document

    Afterwards: incident incident
  1. 24 July 2026 Anthropic · Opus 5 red teaming
    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated

    Finding: not stated in the document

    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stage"Astra's safeguards-enabled checkpoint"
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated
    Finding, in the document's words"On a benchmark of 1,810 curated attacks from Gray Swan's IPI Arena, Astra's safeguards-enabled checkpoint showed improved robustness relative to GPT-5.6 Sol. The estimated attack success rate across 15 attempts per scenario was 8.5%, compared with 27.0% for GPT-5.6 Sol"
    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stage"Gray Swan evaluated Claude models that did not have prompt injection-specific safeguards, and instead had just our standard blocking classifiers enabled (including the classifier-triggered fallbacks)"
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated

    Finding: not stated in the document

    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stage"The Claude models Gray Swan evaluated did not have prompt injection-specific safeguards; they only had our standard blocking classifiers enabled, including classifier-triggered fallbacks"
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated
    Finding, in the document's words"Across every task set, Gray Swan's state judge recorded no breaks, and no attempt produced a violation"
    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated

    Finding: not stated in the document

    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated
    Finding, in the document's words"In independent testing by Gray Swan on their Indirect Prompt Injection benchmark, Gemini 4 Argon achieved the lowest attack success rate of any frontier model tested"
    • Access windownot stated
    • Model stagenot stated
    • Publicationnot stated
    • Paymentnot stated

    Finding: not stated in the document

Dated 12 of 12Model named 12 of 12Terms stated 7 of 12Finding quoted 4 of 12

The terms, as the documents state them

The same engagements as a grid, one row per document and model, so the silences line up: a document that gives an access window but no payment term, or a finding but no publication term, reads that way here.

DocumentModelAccess windowModel stagePublicationPaymentFindingRecord
Claude Opus 4.6 system cardAnthropic · February 2026Opus 4.6not statednot statednot statednot statednot stated40155690d5
Claude Mythos Preview system cardAnthropic · 7 April 2026Mythos Previewnot statednot statednot statednot statednot statede677d2a296
Muse Spark Safety and Preparedness ReportMeta · 26 May 2026Muse Sparknot statednot statednot statednot statedquoted940e8d1d86
Claude Opus 4.8 system cardAnthropic · 28 May 2026Opus 4.8"a one week bug-bounty program hosted with Gray Swan"not statednot statednot statednot stateda40b7d4954
Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 system cardAnthropic · 9 June 2026Fable 5 / Mythos 5not statednot statednot stated"GraySwan and Anthropic are running an ongoing bug bounty in which we reward red-teamers for developing jailbreaks for our safeguards"not stated89b0bfd357
Claude Opus 5 system cardAnthropic · 24 July 2026Opus 5not statednot statednot statednot statednot statedb68a0e9a23
GPT-6 Astra system cardOpenAI · August 2026GPT-6 Astranot stated"Astra's safeguards-enabled checkpoint"not statednot statedquotedd3040ef66b
Claude Fable 5.1 and Mythos 5.1 system cardAnthropic · 1 September 2026Fable 5.1not stated"Gray Swan evaluated Claude models that did not have prompt injection-specific safeguards, and instead had just our standard blocking classifiers enabled (including the classifier-triggered fallbacks)"not statednot statednot statedb04dbdf97b
Claude Opus 5.5 system cardAnthropic · 22 September 2026Opus 5.5not stated"The Claude models Gray Swan evaluated did not have prompt injection-specific safeguards; they only had our standard blocking classifiers enabled, including classifier-triggered fallbacks"not statednot statedquoted38046035c6
Claude Sonnet 5.5 system cardAnthropic · 28 September 2026Sonnet 5.5not statednot statednot statednot statednot stated1f3c8aed83
Gemini 4 Argon Safety and Security ReportGoogle DeepMind · October 2026Gemini 4 Argonnot statednot statednot statednot statedquoted5ee8f26adf
Claude Haiku 5.5 system cardAnthropic · 7 October 2026Haikunot statednot statednot statednot statednot stated0094ddde55

Access window 1 of 12Model stage 3 of 12Publication 0 of 12Payment 1 of 12Finding, quoted 4 of 12

What happened afterwards 2 on record

Events a party published after an engagement: an incident on a model this evaluator's engagement covered, a correction or added disclosure, a later finding that cut against an earlier one, a lab's statement that it acted or did not act on the finding, or a move from this evaluator to a lab it graded. A row the source attaches to this evaluator by name is marked named; one that reaches it through the model it tested is marked via the model. The kind is what the record states, not why.

KindDeveloperModelWhat the record statesWhenSourceId
incidentvia the modelAnthropicMythos 5; Opus 4.7"we identified three incidents in which a model accessed the internet from within or while interacting with the evaluation environment of Irregular, one of our third-party evaluation partners, and then gained unauthorized access to the production infrastructure of three different organizations"; "The incidents involved three different Claude models: Opus 4.7, Mythos 5, and an internal research test model"; "We notified our evaluation partner Irregular and the three affected organizations on Monday, July 27"Engagements: 372a2684c3, df7e3d705a, 89b0bfd357, 5e8de70f4c, c21b5b566230 July 2026Anthropic, investigating three incidentsdd4457ea07
incidentvia the modelAnthropicMythos 5The Institute's own cyber-testing incident: "in 10 of the 122 runs, we identified 19 cases where an agent had taken distinct actions beyond the scope of the testing parameters. 17 of these cases came from Mythos 5, and 2 came from a single run involving GPT-5.6 Sol"; "The developers' cyber classifiers were deliberately switched off"; "This behaviour occurred between July 25th and July 28th 2026"; "We also intend to work with METR (Model Evaluation and Threat Research) to conduct an independent third-party review"Engagements: 372a2684c3, df7e3d705a, 89b0bfd357, 5e8de70f4c, c21b5b56624 August 2026AISI, incident report1a39056dce

Dated 2 of 2Model named 2 of 2Tied to an engagement 2 of 2Evaluator named by the record 2 of 2

The money on record 3 rows

Rows of the observatory's money table that name this evaluator as recipient (in) or as funder (out), each as the record states it: a grant table line, a contract notice, a Form 990 schedule or the party's own disclosure. A figure quoted in prose is marked and never summed.

DirectionFunderRecipientAmount, as recordedWhenRecordSourceId
inUK DSITGray Swan£128,770£128,770 (Jan 2024)Jan 2024contract noticeFind a Tender; Find a Tender; Contracts Finder; Contracts Finder; Contracts Finder; Find a Tender, variatione18da52332
inUK DSITGray Swan£440,000£440,000 to Gray Swan (Aug 2024)to Gray SwanAug 2024contract noticeFind a Tender; Find a Tender; Contracts Finder; Contracts Finder; Contracts Finder; Find a Tender, variationd1d7123d3d
inUK DSITGray Swan£128,770£128,770"AI Research - Robust Safeguards and Offensive Cyber Capability Measurement provided by GraySwan AI"January 2024contract noticeContracts Findera7ed3ed53f

Amount stated 3 of 3Dated 3 of 3Purpose stated 2 of 3Funder profiled 0 of 3Recipient on the roster 3 of 3

Seats and moves 3 seats · 0 moves

Seats read off a team page, a governance page, an appointment notice or a filing that name this organization, and the dated moves into or out of it, from the observatory's own tables.

PersonSideSeat, as the record states itRoleDatesSourceId
Matt Fredriksonslice evaluatorCo-founder and CEO, Gray SwanCo-founder and CEOdates not statedGray Swanf47ecc7f32
Zico Kolterslice evaluatorCo-founder and Chief Scientist, Gray SwanCo-founder and Chief Scientistdates not statedGray Swan1c756254b7
Dan Hendrycksslice evaluatorAdviser to Gray Swan; announced as Chief Strategy Advisor 16 Jul 2024, divested his equity 25 Jul 2024 and stayed "as an advisor, without pay"Adviserdates not statedhis post; arXiv 2504.16137; Fortuneee2cfd2162

Role read 3 of 3Organization read 3 of 3Organization profiled 3 of 3Dated 0 of 3

Moves

PersonFromToWhenSourceId
no move on record names this evaluator

From profiled 0 of 0To profiled 0 of 0Person profiled 0 of 0Dated 0 of 0