CorrectGuard: Eyes-Off Correctness Estimation for Black-Box Security Guardrails
cs.CR
Submitted: 2026-10-02
Updated: 2026-10-02
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: AI services increasingly rely on black-box security guardrails, yet privacy-preserving model auditing regimes often cannot measure how well these systems perform in both a human eyes-off production
Abstract
AI services increasingly rely on black-box security guardrails, yet privacy-preserving model auditing regimes often cannot measure how well these systems perform in both a human eyes-off production setting, which disallows human inspection of user input, and a machine eyes-off setting, which disallows model inspection of such input. We introduce CorrectGuard, an eyes-off correctness estimation framework for both settings, which involves an independent model-based evaluator predicting whether guardrail decisions on human- and machine-inaccessible inputs are correct using only labeled eyes-on data and without access to the guardrail's internals. We evaluate in-context learning, embedding, and finetuning-based correctness models under leave-one-dataset-out evaluation across 13 safety and security datasets spanning harmful content, jailbreaks, prompt injection, and extraction, and across open-weight guardrails treated uniformly as black boxes. Across both human and machine eyes-off settings (the latter implemented using privacy-preserving fingerprinting of inputs), in-context-learning-based correctness classifiers substantially improve error identification across guardrails, achieving up to a 25 percentage-point increase in macro accuracy, as do finetuning-based approaches which provide a nearly 15-point boost, although performance varies sharply across guardrails and held-out datasets. Correctness scores also support guardrail decision ranking and abstention: across 3 guardrails, the best correctness rankings reduce AURC from unranked baselines of 0.33-0.44 to 0.17-0.22, while the best operating points retain 37.5-52.0% of guardrail decisions at 15% observed risk. These results show that external correctness models can expose systematic failures and support guardrail decision abstention without privileged access to the guardrail.
Sources
- Evaluating the efficacy of LLM Safety Solutions : The Palit Benchmark Dataset
- Longitudinal Monitoring of LLM Content Moderation of Social Issues
- Agentic Witnessing: Pragmatic and Scalable TEE-Enabled Privacy-Preserving Auditing
- Text Embeddings Reveal (Almost) As Much As Text
- Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversations
- Benchmarking Open-Source Safety Guard Models: A Comprehensive Evaluation
- A Multi-Perspective Benchmark and Moderation Model for Evaluating Safety and Adversarial Robustness
- Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know
- Uncertainty Estimation and Quantification for LLMs: A Simple Supervised Approach
- Llamas Know What GPTs Don't Show: Surrogate Models for Confidence Estimation
- Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems
- Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback
- Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena
- BinaryShield: Cross-Service Threat Intelligence in LLM Services using Privacy-Preserving Fingerprints
- When Benchmarks Lie: Evaluating Malicious Prompt Classifiers Under True Distribution Shift
- InjecAgent: Benchmarking Indirect Prompt Injections in Tool-Integrated Large Language Model Agents
- LLMail-Inject: A Dataset from a Realistic Adaptive Prompt Injection Challenge
- Gandalf the Red: Adaptive Security for LLMs
- Granite Guardian
- Qwen3Guard Technical Report
Related papers
- SoK: AI-Augmented Binary Reversing
- Relaxed Sender Anonymity for CBDC Interbank Settlement: A Zero-Knowledge Approach on Permissioned EVM
- Calibration-Family Overfit: Why Trusted Sabotage Monitors Don't Transfer Across Lineages
- Efficient Fuzzy PSI under One-Sided Assumptions
- Sealing the Audit-Runtime Gap for LLM Skills
- Token Composition: A Graph Based on EVM Logs