Can you defend the system?
55 decision points, pulled straight from 41 real attack scenarios. At each one, an attack is in progress — choose the response that actually stops it. Every answer reveals the honest reason it holds or breaks, and your misses point you back to the scenarios worth studying. Pick a difficulty and go.
Retrieval just returned weak, low-relevance chunks and the model is about to answer a high-stakes policy question. Which control would most directly prevent the coming harm?
From the scenario The Refund That Never Existed
This attacks the root cause directly. Hallucination harm here is 'confident assertion unsupported by evidence'; requiring grounding and allowing abstention removes exactly that. It's the strongest single control for this failure.
A common but mistaken reflex. Temperature governs how much the model varies between runs, not whether a given answer is true. The fabrication is the single most-likely continuation, so low temperature locks it in rather than removing it.
Guardrails matter, but they catch the wrong thing here. A fabricated policy is fluent, polite, and PII-free. Detecting hallucination requires comparing the claim to evidence (grounding), which a category filter doesn't do.