Paper

{
  "raw_xml": "<entry>\n    <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.21551v1</id>\n    <title>AI In Cybersecurity Education -- Scalable Agentic CTF Design Principles and Educational Outcomes</title>\n    <updated>2026-03-23T04:05:59Z</updated>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.21551v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.21551v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n    <summary>Large language models are rapidly changing how learners acquire and demonstrate cybersecurity skills. However, when human--AI collaboration is allowed, educators still lack validated competition designs and evaluation practices that remain fair and evidence-based. This paper presents a cross-regional study of LLM-centered Capture-the-Flag competitions built on the Cyber Security Awareness Week competition system. To understand how autonomy levels and participants' knowledge backgrounds influence problem-solving performance and learning-related behaviors, we formalize three autonomy levels: human-in-the-loop, autonomous agent frameworks, and hybrid. To enable verification, we require traceable submissions including conversation logs, agent trajectories, and agent code. We analyze multi-region competition data covering an in-class track, a standard track, and a year-long expert track, each targeting participants with different knowledge backgrounds. Using data from the 2025 competition, we compare solve performance across autonomy levels and challenge categories, and observe that autonomous agent frameworks and hybrid achieve higher completion rates on challenges requiring iterative testing and tool interactions. In the in-class track, we classify participants' agent designs and find a preference for lightweight, tool-augmented prompting and reflection-based retries over complex multi-agent architectures. Our results offer actionable guidance for designing LLM-assisted cybersecurity competitions as learning technologies, including autonomy-specific scoring criteria, evidence requirements that support solution verification, and track structures that improve accessibility while preserving reliable evaluation and engagement.</summary>\n    <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.SE'/>\n    <published>2026-03-23T04:05:59Z</published>\n    <arxiv:primary_category term='cs.SE'/>\n    <author>\n      <name>Haoran Xi</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Minghao Shao</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Kimberly Milner</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Venkata Sai Charan Putrevu</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Nanda Rani</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Meet Udeshi</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Prashanth Krishnamurthy</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Brendan Dolan-Gavitt</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Siddharth Garg</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Sandeep Kumar Shukla</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Farshad Khorrami</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Alon Hillel-Tuch</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Muhammad Shafique</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Ramesh Karri</name>\n    </author>\n  </entry>"
}