SRE-Bench
Software reverse engineering without source: 262 binary instances from 19 private programs, each with six graded objectives.
Programs are private to stay contamination-free.
- Made by
- Columbia DAPLab + Vals AI
- Released
- August 2026
- Kind
- Capture-the-flag challenges
- Level
- Expert
- Scored
- Checked automatically
- Answers
- Agent task
- Tasks
- Kept private
- Strongest model tested
- GPT-6 Astra #3 on the capability index
- Last in a launch post
- November 2026
- Last model added
- November 2026
- Scores refreshed
- November 12th, 2026
In the authors’ words
AI agents are rapidly improving in cybersecurity when source code is available, yet much of the software most consequential to security, including malware, firmware, and proprietary applications, exists only as binaries. Analyzing such software requires reverse engineering (RE): recovering program semantics before analysis can proceed. Evaluating agentic RE poses a fundamental challenge: realistic benchmark instances must (1) be absent from LLMs' training data to prevent shortcuts by memorization, and (2) reflect the scale and anti-analysis protections of real-world binaries. We introduce SRE-Bench, the first realistic, contamination-free RE benchmark. Built from scratch by RE experts with over 5,000 expert hours, SRE-Bench comprises 19 private, real-world-scale programs averaging 16.9K lines of code. We further developed 44 in-house anti-analysis mechanisms, yielding 262 binary instances and 1,572 deterministically graded tasks. We evaluated 13 agentic settings across 11 models: eight in public-facing settings and five in internal unconstrained settings with cyber safeguards disabled and no budget cap. Realistic RE remains challenging for frontier agents: GPT-5.6-Sol and Claude-Fable-5.1, despite strong source-code security capabilities, fully solve only 31.5% and 26.9% of graded instances, suggesting that success in source-code security does not translate into effective binary analysis. Without a budget cap and safety guard, GPT-6-Astra achieves a near-perfect pass@4 score, yet reliably identifying the correct candidate remains difficult. Agents are largely insensitive to compiler optimization and static linking, and ablations confirm that both contamination control and realistic scale are essential to understanding agents' RE capability. These findings highlight RE as a distinct frontier for agentic cybersecurity and establish SRE-Bench as a rigorous testbed for measuring progress.
GPT-6 Astra leads with 56.9%
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on November 12th, 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Every run is in the next chart. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders.
GPT-6 Cyber leads with 92.8%, claims included
Best score per model from every source, including labs’ own numbers and claims Epoch AI collected from reports and papers. Labs pick their own settings, so a claim can beat an independent run of the same model.
- 56.9 GPT-6 Astra
- 50.8 GPT-6.1 Sol
- 44.3
Gemini 4 Argon
- 33.6 Claude Opus 5.5
- 31.7 Daybreak Blue
- 30.5 GPT-5.6 Sol
- 30.5 GPT-6 Sol
- 30.1 Claude Sonnet 5.5
- 27.1 Kimi K3.1 Pro
- 22.9 Claude Fable 5.1
- 21.8 Claude Opus 5.5 (CVP)
- 12.2 Claude Opus 5
- 11.8
Muse Wonder Full
- 11.1
Gemini 3.8 Flash
- 9.54 GPT-5.6 Terra
- 9.16 GLM-5.3
- 5.72 Claude Haiku 5.5
- 4.58
Gemini 3.7 Flash
- 4.20 MiMo-V2.6 Flash
- 3.82 GPT-5.5
- 3.82
Muse Spark 1.3
- 3.82 Grok 4.7
- 3.05 MiMo-V2.6 Pro
- 2.67 GPT-6 Luna
- 2.29
Tencent Hy4 preview
- 1.91
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
- 1.91
Inkling 2 Small
- 1.53 GPT-5.6 Luna
- 0.76 Grok 4.5
- 0.76 GLM-5.3-Flash
- 0.76
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 0.38 Claude Sonnet 5
- 0.38
Step 5 Preview
- 0.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 0.0 GLM-5.2
- 0.0
Inkling
- 0.0
Muse Spark 1.2
- 1 GPT-6 Astra 56.9%
- 2 GPT-6.1 Sol 50.8%
- 3
Gemini 4 Argon 44.3%
- 4 Claude Opus 5.5 33.6%
- 5 Daybreak Blue 31.7%
- 6 GPT-5.6 Sol 30.5%
- 7 GPT-6 Sol 30.5%
- 8 Claude Sonnet 5.5 30.1%
- 9 Kimi K3.1 Pro 27.1%
- 10 Claude Fable 5.1 22.9%
- 11 Claude Opus 5.5 (CVP) 21.8%
- 12 Claude Opus 5 12.2%
- 13
Muse Wonder Full 11.8%
- 14
Gemini 3.8 Flash 11.1%
- 15 GPT-5.6 Terra 9.54%
- 16 GLM-5.3 9.16%
- 17 Claude Haiku 5.5 5.72%
- 18
Gemini 3.7 Flash 4.58%
- 19 MiMo-V2.6 Flash 4.20%
- 20 GPT-5.5 3.82%
- 21
Muse Spark 1.3 max 3.82%
- 22 Grok 4.7 3.82%
- 23 MiMo-V2.6 Pro 3.05%
- 24 GPT-6 Luna 2.67%
- 25
Tencent Hy4 preview 2.29%
- 26
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 1.91%
- 27
Inkling 2 Small 1.91%
- 28 GPT-5.6 Luna 1.53%
- 29 Grok 4.5 0.76%
- 30 GLM-5.3-Flash 0.76%
- 31
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 0.76%
- 32 Claude Sonnet 5 0.38%
- 33
Step 5 Preview 0.38%
- 34
Gemini 3.1 Pro 0%
- 35 GLM-5.2 0%
- 36
Inkling 0%
- 37
Muse Spark 1.2 0%
Source: Official SRE-Bench leaderboard
- 92.8 GPT-6 Cyber
- 88.0 GPT-6 Astra
- 50.8 GPT-6.1 Sol
- 44.3
Gemini 4 Argon
- 33.6 Claude Opus 5.5
- 30.5 GPT-5.6 Sol
- 30.5 GPT-6 Sol
- 30.1 Claude Sonnet 5.5
- 27.1 Kimi K3.1 Pro
- 22.9 Claude Fable 5.1
- 12.2 Claude Opus 5
- 11.8
Muse Wonder Full
- 11.1
Gemini 3.8 Flash
- 9.54 GPT-5.6 Terra
- 9.16 GLM-5.3
- 5.72 Claude Haiku 5.5
- 4.58
Gemini 3.7 Flash
- 4.20 MiMo-V2.6 Flash
- 3.82 GPT-5.5
- 3.82
Muse Spark 1.3
- 3.82 Grok 4.7
- 3.05 MiMo-V2.6 Pro
- 2.67 GPT-6 Luna
- 2.29
Tencent Hy4 preview
- 1.91
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
- 1.91
Inkling 2 Small
- 1.53 GPT-5.6 Luna
- 0.76 Grok 4.5
- 0.76 GLM-5.3-Flash
- 0.76
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- 0.38 Claude Sonnet 5
- 0.38
Step 5 Preview
- 0.0
Gemini 3.1 Pro
- 0.0 GLM-5.2
- 0.0
Inkling
- 0.0
Muse Spark 1.2
- 1 GPT-6 Cyber 92.8%
- 2 GPT-6 Astra 88%
- 3 GPT-6.1 Sol 50.8%
- 4
Gemini 4 Argon 44.3%
- 5 Claude Opus 5.5 33.6%
- 6 GPT-5.6 Sol 30.5%
- 7 GPT-6 Sol 30.5%
- 8 Claude Sonnet 5.5 30.1%
- 9 Kimi K3.1 Pro 27.1%
- 10 Claude Fable 5.1 22.9%
- 11 Claude Opus 5 12.2%
- 12
Muse Wonder Full 11.8%
- 13
Gemini 3.8 Flash 11.1%
- 14 GPT-5.6 Terra 9.54%
- 15 GLM-5.3 9.16%
- 16 Claude Haiku 5.5 5.72%
- 17
Gemini 3.7 Flash 4.58%
- 18 MiMo-V2.6 Flash 4.20%
- 19 GPT-5.5 3.82%
- 20
Muse Spark 1.3 max 3.82%
- 21 Grok 4.7 3.82%
- 22 MiMo-V2.6 Pro 3.05%
- 23 GPT-6 Luna 2.67%
- 24
Tencent Hy4 preview 2.29%
- 25
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 1.91%
- 26
Inkling 2 Small 1.91%
- 27 GPT-5.6 Luna 1.53%
- 28 Grok 4.5 0.76%
- 29 GLM-5.3-Flash 0.76%
- 30
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 0.76%
- 31 Claude Sonnet 5 0.38%
- 32
Step 5 Preview 0.38%
- 33
Gemini 3.1 Pro 0%
- 34 GLM-5.2 0%
- 35
Inkling 0%
- 36
Muse Spark 1.2 0%
Sources: Labs’ model cards and official SRE-Bench leaderboard
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-6 Astra | 56.9% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 2 | GPT-6.1 Sol | 50.8% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 3 | | 44.3% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | Claude Opus 5.5 | 33.6% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | Daybreak Blue | 31.7% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 6 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 30.5% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | GPT-6 Sol | 30.5% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 30.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Kimi K3.1 Pro | 27.1% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 22.9% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | Claude Opus 5.5 (CVP) | 21.8% | Official leaderboard | ||
| 12 | Claude Opus 5 | 12.2% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 11.8% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | | 11.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | GPT-5.6 Terra | 9.54% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | GLM-5.3 | 9.16% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | Claude Haiku 5.5 | 5.72% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | | 4.58% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | MiMo-V2.6 Flash | 4.20% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | GPT-5.5 | 3.82% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 21 | | 3.82% | max | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 22 | Grok 4.7 | 3.82% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 3.05% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 24 | GPT-6 Luna | 2.67% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 25 | | 2.29% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 26 | | 1.91% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 27 | | 1.91% | Nov 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 28 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 1.53% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 29 | Grok 4.5 | 0.76% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 30 | GLM-5.3-Flash | 0.76% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 31 | | 0.76% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 32 | Claude Sonnet 5 | 0.38% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 33 | | 0.38% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 34 | | 0% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 35 | GLM-5.2 | 0% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 36 | | 0% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 37 | | 0% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-6 Cyber | 92.8% | Nov 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 2 | GPT-6 Astra | 88% | Sep 2026 | Lab model card | |
| 3 | GPT-6.1 Sol | 50.8% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 4 | | 44.3% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 5 | Claude Opus 5.5 | 33.6% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 6 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 30.5% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 7 | GPT-6 Sol | 30.5% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 8 | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 30.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 9 | Kimi K3.1 Pro | 27.1% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 10 | Claude Fable 5.1 | 22.9% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 11 | Claude Opus 5 | 12.2% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 12 | | 11.8% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 13 | | 11.1% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 14 | GPT-5.6 Terra | 9.54% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 15 | GLM-5.3 | 9.16% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 16 | Claude Haiku 5.5 | 5.72% | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 17 | | 4.58% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 18 | MiMo-V2.6 Flash | 4.20% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 19 | GPT-5.5 | 3.82% | Apr 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 20 | | 3.82% | max | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | Grok 4.7 | 3.82% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 22 | MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 3.05% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 23 | GPT-6 Luna | 2.67% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 24 | | 2.29% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 25 | | 1.91% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 26 | | 1.91% | Nov 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 27 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 1.53% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 28 | Grok 4.5 | 0.76% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 29 | GLM-5.3-Flash | 0.76% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 30 | | 0.76% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 31 | Claude Sonnet 5 | 0.38% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 32 | | 0.38% | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 33 | | 0% | Feb 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 34 | GLM-5.2 | 0% | Jun 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 35 | | 0% | Jul 2026 | Official leaderboard | |
| 36 | | 0% | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
Labs report scores for 2 models in their cards. Switch the scores above to rank them together.
Accuracy against latency
The Vals scatter chart with its x axis switched from Cost to Latency: mean time per test against accuracy, on a log scale. The line joins the runs that no other run beats on both measures. We redrew this chart from the numbers on the official leaderboard.
| Model | Setting | Accuracy | Latency (mean per test) |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 Astra | 56.9% | 1,071 s | |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 50.8% | 1,952 s | |
| | 44.3% | 5,696 s | |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | 33.6% | 5,795 s | |
| Daybreak Blue | 31.7% | 10,424 s | |
| GPT-6 Sol | 30.5% | 3,808 s | |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | 30.5% | 5,285 s | |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 30.2% | 6,882 s | |
| Kimi K3.1 Pro | 27.1% | 6,915 s | |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | 22.9% | 7,376 s | |
| Claude Opus 5.5 (CVP) | 21.8% | 12,118 s | |
| Claude Opus 5 | 12.2% | 4,858 s | |
| | 11.8% | 20,035 s | |
| | 11.1% | 8,854 s | |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | 9.5% | 11,801 s | |
| GLM-5.3 | 9.2% | 10,090 s | |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | 5.7% | 3,476 s | |
| | 4.6% | 6,606 s | |
| MiMo-V2.6 Flash | 4.2% | 12,122 s | |
| GPT-5.5 | 3.8% | 2,788 s | |
| Grok 4.7 | 3.8% | 6,043 s | |
| | max | 3.8% | 6,407 s |
| MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 3.1% | 8,563 s | |
| GPT-6 Luna | 2.7% | 4,871 s | |
| | 2.3% | 5,997 s | |
| | 1.9% | 8,370 s | |
| | 1.9% | 8,426 s | |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | 1.5% | 6,114 s | |
| | 0.8% | 3,663 s | |
| Grok 4.5 | 0.8% | 3,939 s | |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | 0.8% | 11,693 s | |
| | 0.4% | 5,625 s | |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | 0.4% | 13,985 s | |
| | 0% | 1,719 s | |
| | 0% | 3,804 s | |
| | 0% | 5,987 s | |
| GLM-5.2 | 0% | 8,960 s |
The best score, 56.9%, costs $10 a task
Runs on the cost frontier score higher than any run that's cheaper. The costs are the leaderboard's own estimates, so compare them only within this benchmark.
Source: Official SRE-Bench leaderboard
| Model | Effort | Harness | Score | Cost per task | Output tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 Astra | 56.9% | $10 | 31,609 | ||
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 50.8% | $2.69 | |||
| | 44.3% | $30 | 165,980 | ||
| Claude Opus 5.5 | 33.6% | $26 | 229,343 | ||
| GPT-5.6 Sol | 30.5% | $43 | 112,756 | ||
| GPT-6 Sol | 30.5% | $21 | 137,089 | ||
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 30.1% | $17 | 335,245 | ||
| Kimi K3.1 Pro | 27.1% | $27 | 204,912 | ||
| Claude Fable 5.1 | 22.9% | $32 | 200,363 | ||
| Claude Opus 5 | 12.2% | $24 | 191,827 | ||
| | 11.8% | $34 | 107,477 | ||
| | 11.1% | $27 | 234,258 | ||
| GPT-5.6 Terra | 9.54% | $31 | 147,164 | ||
| GLM-5.3 | 9.16% | $27 | 272,384 | ||
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | 5.72% | $3.14 | 320,162 | ||
| | 4.58% | $21 | 193,954 | ||
| MiMo-V2.6 Flash | 4.20% | $0.40 | 337,831 | ||
| GPT-5.5 | 3.82% | $18 | 64,334 | ||
| | max | 3.82% | $26 | 380,399 | |
| Grok 4.7 | 3.82% | $65 | 200,178 | ||
| MiMo-V2.6 Pro | 3.05% | $0.53 | 247,671 | ||
| GPT-6 Luna | 2.67% | $1.55 | 291,615 | ||
| | 2.29% | $4.90 | 185,886 | ||
| | 1.91% | $5.58 | 256,063 | ||
| | 1.91% | $6.67 | 446,426 | ||
| GPT-5.6 Luna | 1.53% | $3.44 | 176,821 | ||
| Grok 4.5 | 0.76% | $13 | 118,147 | ||
| GLM-5.3-Flash | 0.76% | $2.29 | 165,060 | ||
| | 0.76% | $0.55 | 212,868 | ||
| Claude Sonnet 5 | 0.38% | $18 | 299,587 | ||
| | 0.38% | $3.07 | 267,941 | ||
| | 0% | $11 | 84,209 | ||
| GLM-5.2 | 0% | $27 | 204,975 | ||
| | 0% | $2.23 | 64,530 | ||
| | 0% | $23 | 195,621 |
2 models have held number one on the official leaderboard since its release in August 2026 3 models have held number one with claims included since its release in August 2026
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release. We draw one row each for the benchmark’s own leaderboard and what labs claim in their cards.
Sources: Official SRE-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
OpenAI’s own number for GPT-6 Astra passed 85% in September 2026
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Sources: Official SRE-Bench leaderboard and labs’ model cards
One lab put it in a launch post in the last six months
Launch posts from every lab that has listed it, one tick per post. Tall colored ticks include it, and short gray ones leave it out.
| Date | Launch post | Score | As the post writes it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 5, 2026 | GPT-6 Cyber | 92.8 | SRE-Bench, pass@1, all six objectives required |
2 system cards report it, from 1 lab
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 5, 2026 | GPT-6 Cyber system card | 92.8 | SRE-Bench, pass@1, all six objectives required | Cyber risk |
| Sep 3, 2026 | GPT-6 Astra system card | 88 | SRE-Bench, pass@4 (pass@1 88.0%, printed chart label) (10.1.2.3, Figure 50) | Cyber risk |
One lab claim next to the leaderboard
Each score a lab reported for its own model, beside the same model's best score on the leaderboard. Gaps mostly come from different harnesses, effort levels and task subsets. Every benchmark.
| Model | Lab says | Board says | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-6 Astra | 88% SRE-Bench, pass@4 (pass@1 88.0%, printed chart label) (10.1.2.3, Figure 50) | 56.9% Leaderboard | +31 pts |
More in Cybersecurity
- ExploitGym In use 869 real-vulnerability exploit-development tasks (userspace, V8, Linux kernel). Success means capturing a flag through the intended vulnerability. GPT-6 Astra 42.4%
- ExploitBench In use 41 recent V8 JavaScript-engine N-day vulnerabilities. Progress measured by 16 grader-verified capability flags across five tiers. GPT-6 Astra 100%
- CyberBench v1.1 (Vals) In use Agents work on OSS-Fuzz memory-safety bugs from ARVO images in two tracks. They write a proof-of-concept input that crashes the target, or patch the source so the crash stops and tests still pass.
Muse Wonder 80.4%
- CyScenarioBench In use Scenario-based long-horizon security challenges in sandboxes, organized in task, scenario and campaign tiers. Evaluation set kept private.
Gemini 4 Argon 100%
- ExploitBench - Internal Port In use Agents develop working exploits for recently disclosed vulnerabilities to limit contamination. Scored as arbitrary code execution success rate. GPT-6 Cyber 42%
- MiMo Cyber Bench In use Agents do in-house cybersecurity tasks that add to public vulnerability reproduction and exploitation benchmarks. The report gives no task count or grading details. MiMo-V2.6 Pro 81.7%