Agentic Design

Patterns

Agentic AI Attacks

Multi-agent security testing and autonomous system exploitation techniques

50
Techniques
29
high
high Complexity
19
medium
medium Complexity
2
low
low Complexity

Available Techniques

🤖

Multi-Agent Orchestration Attack

(MAOA)
high

Exploitation of communication vulnerabilities between multiple AI agents in an orchestrated system, manipulating inter-agent messaging to achieve unauthorized objectives.

Key Features

  • Inter-agent message injection
  • Orchestration layer manipulation
  • Agent coordination disruption

Primary Defenses

  • Message signing and verification
  • Agent authentication protocols
  • Communication encryption

Key Risks

Unauthorized agent actionsSystem integrity compromiseData exfiltration through agent chainsCascading failures across agents
🎯

Agent Goal Manipulation

(AGM)
medium

Manipulation of an autonomous agent's objectives or goals through prompt injection, context manipulation, or system prompt override, causing the agent to pursue attacker-controlled objectives.

Key Features

  • Objective redefinition
  • Goal drift induction
  • Priority manipulation

Primary Defenses

  • Immutable goal specifications
  • Goal validation checkpoints
  • System prompt protection

Key Risks

Unauthorized objective executionResource misallocationData privacy violationsSystem misuse
🔓

Agent Permission Escalation

(APE)
high

Exploitation of permission and access control vulnerabilities in agentic systems to grant an agent unauthorized capabilities or access to restricted resources.

Key Features

  • Role boundary violation
  • Capability expansion attacks
  • Permission inheritance exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • Principle of least privilege
  • Explicit permission grants per action
  • Permission validation at execution time

Key Risks

Unauthorized data modificationSystem configuration changesPrivilege escalation to admin levelSecurity control bypass
🤝

Multi-Agent Collusion Attack

(MACA)
high

Coordinating multiple agents to work together maliciously, bypassing individual agent restrictions through distributed, collaborative exploitation.

Key Features

  • Distributed task splitting
  • Information sharing between compromised agents
  • Collective policy bypass

Primary Defenses

  • Agent isolation and sandboxing
  • Information flow controls
  • Behavioral correlation analysis

Key Risks

Policy circumvention through distributionCollective data exfiltrationCoordinated system manipulationTrust model exploitation
🎭

Confused Deputy Attack

(CDA)
medium

Tricking a privileged agent into performing unauthorized actions on behalf of an attacker by exploiting the agent's trust in its inputs or tools.

Key Features

  • Privilege abuse through trusted paths
  • Tool invocation manipulation
  • Authority exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • Explicit authorization for tool use
  • Request origin validation
  • Action authorization verification

Key Risks

Unauthorized privileged actionsTrust model circumventionSecurity control bypassData modification by proxy
🔧

Tool Integration Exploitation

(TIE)
medium

Exploitation of vulnerabilities in the integration between AI agents and external tools, functions, or APIs, leading to unauthorized tool usage or malicious function calls.

Key Features

  • Function calling manipulation
  • Tool parameter injection
  • API endpoint exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • Strict parameter validation
  • Function call authorization
  • Tool capability restrictions

Key Risks

Unauthorized tool executionParameter injection attacksAPI abuseSystem function misuse
👻

Agent Action Untraceability

(AAU)
high

Techniques to make agent actions difficult or impossible to trace, audit, or attribute, enabling covert malicious activities within agentic systems.

Key Features

  • Log suppression
  • Action obfuscation
  • Attribution confusion

Primary Defenses

  • Immutable audit logs
  • Comprehensive action logging
  • Log integrity verification

Key Risks

Inability to detect malicious actionsCompromised forensic investigationsAccountability lossCompliance violations
🔄

Recursive Agent Subversion

(RAS)
high

Self-propagating exploitation where a compromised agent subverts other agents it interacts with, creating a chain of compromised agents throughout the system.

Key Features

  • Agent-to-agent infection
  • Payload propagation
  • Cascading compromise

Primary Defenses

  • Agent sandboxing and isolation
  • Communication sanitization
  • Behavioral anomaly detection

Key Risks

System-wide compromiseRapid attack propagationLoss of system controlDifficult containment

Excessive Agency Exploitation

(EAE)
medium

Exploitation of agents that have been granted excessive permissions, capabilities, or autonomy beyond what is necessary for their intended function.

Key Features

  • Over-permission abuse
  • Scope creep exploitation
  • Capability misuse

Primary Defenses

  • Strict permission minimization
  • Role-based capability constraints
  • Regular permission audits

Key Risks

Unauthorized scope expansionPrivilege misuseSystem function abuseSecurity control bypass
♾️

Agent Feedback Loop Poisoning

(AFLP)
high

Manipulation of learning or improvement feedback loops in agents to gradually corrupt their behavior, decision-making, or learned patterns over time.

Key Features

  • Gradual behavior corruption
  • Feedback manipulation
  • Learning process poisoning

Primary Defenses

  • Feedback validation and filtering
  • Learning rate limits
  • Behavior drift detection

Key Risks

Gradual behavior corruptionLearned vulnerability injectionLong-term system degradationDifficult-to-detect compromise
📤

Data Exfiltration Testing

(DET)
high

Testing agents' ability to prevent unauthorized data access and exfiltration across session boundaries, user contexts, and application scopes through isolation control validation.

Key Features

  • Cross-session data isolation testing
  • Cross-customer data boundary validation
  • Cross-application data leakage testing

Primary Defenses

  • Strong session-level data isolation
  • Customer-specific data boundaries
  • Application context segregation

Key Risks

Cross-session data leakageCross-customer privacy violationsMulti-tenant data exposureContext boundary bypass
🔍

Goal Extraction Attempt Testing

(GEAT)
medium

Testing agent resilience against adversarial attempts to extract internal goals, objectives, or instructions through probing, escalation tactics, or dialog manipulation.

Key Features

  • Goal disclosure resistance testing
  • System prompt extraction prevention
  • Objective inference resistance

Primary Defenses

  • System prompt isolation and protection
  • Goal disclosure filters
  • Instruction redaction mechanisms

Key Risks

System prompt disclosureGoal extraction by adversariesInstruction leakageObjective inference
🔮

Hallucination Chain Exploitation

(HCE)
high

Exploiting cascading hallucinations across multiple agents in a chain, where false information from one agent propagates and amplifies through subsequent agents, compounding misinformation.

Key Features

  • Cascading false outputs
  • Multi-step hallucination propagation
  • Compounding misinformation

Primary Defenses

  • Multi-source verification requirements
  • Hallucination detection at each step
  • Fact-checking integration

Key Risks

Cascading misinformationDifficult error detectionAmplified false confidenceSystem-wide incorrect conclusions
🎭

Orchestrator Poisoning Attack

(OPA)
high

Targeting the master orchestrator or coordination layer that manages multiple agents, compromising the central decision-making and task distribution system to control all subordinate agents.

Key Features

  • Master agent compromise
  • Coordination layer manipulation
  • Task distribution control

Primary Defenses

  • Orchestrator hardening and isolation
  • Master agent authentication
  • Coordination validation

Key Risks

Complete system compromiseCentralized point of failureAll agents potentially controlledDifficult to detect from subordinate level
🧪

Orchestrator State Poisoning via Agent Responses

(OSPAR)
high

Testing orchestrator resilience to having its internal memory, context, or planning capabilities corrupted by malicious or manipulated responses from the agents it manages, causing degraded decision-making across the system.

Key Features

  • Agent response manipulation
  • Orchestrator context corruption
  • Planning capability poisoning

Primary Defenses

  • Agent response validation and sanitization
  • State integrity verification
  • Context corruption detection

Key Risks

Orchestrator decision degradationSystem-wide planning failuresCascading incorrect task distributionPersistent state corruption
🎯

Data Exfiltration via Goal Inference

(DEGI)
high

Manipulating an agent's goal inference mechanisms to extract sensitive data by framing data access as necessary to achieve legitimate-seeming objectives.

Key Features

  • Goal-justified data access
  • Objective manipulation for exfiltration
  • Legitimate-appearing data requests

Primary Defenses

  • Explicit data access policies
  • Goal-independent access controls
  • Data minimization enforcement

Key Risks

Subtle data exfiltrationJustified unauthorized accessDifficult detectionLarge-scale data leakage
🤝

Inter-Agent Trust Exploitation

(IATE)
high

Exploiting trust relationships between agents by spoofing identity, forging authentication, or abusing certificate systems to impersonate trusted agents and gain unauthorized access.

Key Features

  • Agent identity spoofing
  • Authentication forgery
  • Certificate manipulation

Primary Defenses

  • Strong agent authentication
  • Certificate-based verification
  • Zero-trust architecture between agents

Key Risks

Unauthorized agent impersonationTrust model circumventionPrivileged access through spoofingAuthentication bypass
🚧

Runtime Guardrail Bypass

(RGB)
medium

Bypassing runtime security guardrails and safety mechanisms that are meant to constrain agent behavior during execution, allowing agents to perform prohibited actions.

Key Features

  • Runtime constraint bypass
  • Safety mechanism evasion
  • Behavioral limit circumvention

Primary Defenses

  • Multi-layer guardrails
  • Pre and post-execution validation
  • Atomic safety checks

Key Risks

Prohibited action executionSafety mechanism failureConstraint violationReal-time protection bypass
👤

Agent Identity Spoofing

(AIS)
medium

Creating fake agent identities or cloning legitimate agent identities to infiltrate agent networks, intercept communications, or execute unauthorized actions under false credentials.

Key Features

  • Fake identity creation
  • Agent cloning
  • Credential theft

Primary Defenses

  • Strong agent registration
  • Identity verification mechanisms
  • Credential encryption and protection

Key Risks

Unauthorized network accessTask interceptionData exfiltrationSystem infiltration
📡

Covert Channel Communication

(CCC)
high

Establishing hidden communication channels between agents or with external systems using timing patterns, steganography, or side channels to exfiltrate data or coordinate attacks without detection.

Key Features

  • Hidden communication establishment
  • Timing-based channels
  • Steganographic data hiding

Primary Defenses

  • Communication pattern analysis
  • Timing anomaly detection
  • Traffic normalization

Key Risks

Undetected data exfiltrationHidden command and controlMonitoring evasionPersistent communication channels
👁️

Human Oversight Bypass

(HOB)
high

Bypassing human-in-the-loop (HITL) requirements by manipulating agent workflows to execute critical actions autonomously without required human approval or verification.

Key Features

  • HITL requirement circumvention
  • Approval mechanism bypass
  • Autonomous critical action execution

Primary Defenses

  • Strict HITL enforcement for critical actions
  • Immutable approval requirements
  • Action classification validation

Key Risks

Unauthorized critical action executionFinancial or operational damageCompliance violationsAccountability gaps
⚠️

Autonomous Critical Action Execution

(ACAE)
high

Testing agents' ability to autonomously execute high-risk or critical actions without proper human verification, including dangerous system changes, data deletions, or financial transactions.

Key Features

  • Critical action autonomous execution
  • Risk threshold bypass
  • Safety constraint circumvention

Primary Defenses

  • Critical action whitelist/blacklist
  • Risk-based verification thresholds
  • Action impact prediction

Key Risks

Catastrophic system changesIrreversible data lossFinancial lossesService disruption
📋

Approval Workflow Manipulation

(AWM)
medium

Manipulating approval workflows and decision trees to reroute critical actions away from human reviewers or to auto-approve actions that should require manual review.

Key Features

  • Workflow path manipulation
  • Decision tree bypass
  • Auto-approval exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • Workflow path validation
  • Decision logic auditing
  • Strict routing rules

Key Risks

Unauthorized action approvalWorkflow integrity compromiseApproval mechanism bypassDecision logic manipulation
🚫

Human Verification Evasion

(HVE)
high

Evading human verification checkpoints by fragmenting actions, timing attacks, or exploiting edge cases in verification logic to execute restricted operations without human review.

Key Features

  • Verification checkpoint bypass
  • Action fragmentation
  • Timing-based evasion

Primary Defenses

  • Aggregate action monitoring
  • Temporal correlation analysis
  • Cumulative threshold tracking

Key Risks

Verification bypass through fragmentationCumulative unauthorized actionsThreshold-based protection evasionDelayed detection
👑

Decision Authority Escalation

(DAE)
medium

Escalating an agent's decision-making authority beyond its intended scope, allowing it to autonomously make critical decisions that should require higher-level human approval or oversight.

Key Features

  • Authority boundary bypass
  • Decision scope escalation
  • Privilege elevation for decisions

Primary Defenses

  • Strict decision authority boundaries
  • Scope-based access controls
  • Decision privilege validation

Key Risks

Unauthorized high-value decisionsAuthority boundary violationsFinancial or operational impactAccountability gaps
🔁

Recursive Task Generation Attack

(RTGA)
medium

Causing an agent to generate infinite or exponentially growing recursive tasks, depleting computational resources, memory, and API quotas through uncontrolled task proliferation.

Key Features

  • Infinite task loops
  • Exponential task growth
  • Task queue overflow

Primary Defenses

  • Recursion depth limits
  • Task generation rate limiting
  • Circular dependency detection

Key Risks

System resource exhaustionService denialAPI quota depletionCost explosion
💸

Token Budget Depletion Attack

(TBDA)
low

Manipulating an agent to consume excessive tokens through verbose outputs, repeated operations, or unnecessary processing, depleting token budgets and causing cost overruns or service interruption.

Key Features

  • Token consumption maximization
  • Verbose output exploitation
  • Repeated operation triggering

Primary Defenses

  • Token budget limits per request
  • Output length restrictions
  • Cost threshold alerts

Key Risks

Unexpected cost overrunsService quota exhaustionBudget depletionService interruption
📊

API Quota Exhaustion

(AQE)
medium

Causing an agent to rapidly consume API quotas for external services through excessive requests, parallel operations, or inefficient task execution, leading to service denial.

Key Features

  • Rapid API consumption
  • Parallel request flooding
  • Quota threshold exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • API rate limiting
  • Request batching and optimization
  • Quota monitoring and alerts

Key Risks

Service quota exhaustionAPI access suspensionDownstream service denialOperational disruption
🧠

Agent Memory Exhaustion

(AME)
medium

Causing an agent to consume excessive memory through large context windows, massive data structures, or memory leak exploitation, leading to performance degradation or system crashes.

Key Features

  • Memory consumption maximization
  • Context window bloating
  • Memory leak exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • Memory usage limits
  • Context window size restrictions
  • Aggressive garbage collection

Key Risks

System memory exhaustionPerformance degradationService crashesSystem instability

Computational Resource Flooding

(CRF)
medium

Overwhelming an agent system with computationally expensive operations, complex reasoning tasks, or resource-intensive processing to degrade performance or cause system failure.

Key Features

  • CPU-intensive task triggering
  • Complex computation exploitation
  • Parallel processing abuse

Primary Defenses

  • Computational complexity limits
  • Task timeout enforcement
  • CPU usage quotas

Key Risks

CPU exhaustionSystem slowdownService degradationResource starvation
♾️

Agent DoS via Infinite Loops

(ADIL)
high

Triggering infinite loops in agent logic through circular reasoning, self-referential tasks, or logical paradoxes that cause the agent to hang indefinitely, denying service.

Key Features

  • Infinite loop triggering
  • Circular reasoning exploitation
  • Logical paradox injection

Primary Defenses

  • Loop detection algorithms
  • Strict timeout enforcement
  • Circular reference prevention

Key Risks

Service unavailabilityResource lockingSystem hangsDeadlock conditions
💾

Agent Storage Exhaustion

(ASE)
low

Causing an agent to consume excessive storage through log bloating, memory persistence, file generation, or database growth, leading to storage exhaustion and service failure.

Key Features

  • Storage consumption maximization
  • Log bloating
  • File generation abuse

Primary Defenses

  • Storage quotas and limits
  • Log rotation and cleanup
  • File retention policies

Key Risks

Storage exhaustionService failureBackup failuresSystem instability
🌊

Cascading Failure Exploitation

(CFE)
high

Triggering a failure in one agent that cascades through interconnected agent systems, causing widespread system degradation or complete service failure across multiple components.

Key Features

  • Chain reaction triggering
  • Multi-agent failure propagation
  • Dependency exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • Circuit breaker patterns
  • Failure isolation mechanisms
  • Graceful degradation

Key Risks

System-wide failuresService unavailabilityData processing disruptionMulti-component impact
💥

Blast Radius Amplification Attack

(BRAA)
high

Exploiting high-privilege or highly-connected agents to maximize the blast radius of a compromise, affecting the largest possible number of systems, users, or data through a single point of entry.

Key Features

  • High-privilege agent targeting
  • Hub agent exploitation
  • Maximum impact seeking

Primary Defenses

  • Principle of least privilege
  • Agent privilege segmentation
  • Blast radius containment

Key Risks

Maximum system compromiseMulti-tenant impactWidespread data exposureExtensive remediation required
🔗

Cross-System Impact Propagation

(CSIP)
high

Exploiting agent integrations and cross-system connections to propagate security impacts from one system to another, spreading compromises across organizational or security boundaries.

Key Features

  • Cross-boundary exploitation
  • Integration abuse
  • Multi-system propagation

Primary Defenses

  • Security boundary enforcement
  • Integration authentication
  • Cross-system isolation

Key Risks

Security boundary bypassMulti-environment compromiseThird-party system impactCompliance violations
🏢

Multi-Tenant Impact Exploitation

(MTIE)
high

Exploiting weak tenant isolation in multi-tenant agent systems to propagate impacts from one tenant to others, causing cross-tenant data exposure or service disruption.

Key Features

  • Tenant isolation bypass
  • Cross-tenant impact
  • Shared resource exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • Strong tenant isolation
  • Resource quotas per tenant
  • Separate execution contexts

Key Risks

Cross-tenant data exposureMulti-customer service impactCompliance violationsReputation damage
⛓️

Agent Dependency Chain Exploitation

(ADCE)
medium

Mapping and exploiting agent dependency chains to identify critical path agents whose compromise would cause maximum downstream impact, targeting architectural weak points.

Key Features

  • Dependency mapping
  • Critical path identification
  • Upstream agent targeting

Primary Defenses

  • Dependency redundancy
  • Multiple data sources
  • Critical path protection

Key Risks

Single point of failure exploitationWidespread downstream corruptionBusiness process disruptionData integrity compromise
👻

Trace Evasion Simulation

(TES)
high

Testing the agent's capability to perform actions without leaving adequate logs or traces, and evaluating the system's ability to detect and prevent unauthorized trace removal or log tampering.

Key Features

  • Log suppression detection
  • Trace removal prevention
  • Unauthorized log manipulation detection

Primary Defenses

  • Tamper-resistant logging
  • Real-time log integrity monitoring
  • Immutable audit trails

Key Risks

Untraceable malicious actionsCompromised forensic evidenceAccountability gapsIncident investigation failures
🎭

Role Inheritance and Permission Escalation Testing

(RIPET)
high

Assessing how agents inherit roles and permissions from users, systems, or other agents, focusing on potential misuse, unauthorized privilege escalation, and the system's ability to attribute actions correctly under these conditions.

Key Features

  • Role inheritance tracking
  • Permission escalation detection
  • Action attribution validation

Primary Defenses

  • Strong role inheritance controls
  • Permission escalation detection
  • Comprehensive action logging

Key Risks

Unauthorized privilege escalationMisattributed actionsRole inheritance abuseAccountability failures
🔧

Downstream Tool Activation Analysis

(DTAA)
high

Evaluating how agents trigger downstream tools or services, potentially causing untraceable actions, and assessing the system's capability to correlate actions between agents and the tools they activate across the entire chain.

Key Features

  • Tool activation tracking
  • Action chain correlation
  • Downstream traceability

Primary Defenses

  • Comprehensive tool activation logging
  • Action chain correlation
  • End-to-end traceability

Key Risks

Untraceable downstream actionsBroken action chainsAttribution gapsAccountability failures
🔍

Forensic Analysis Obfuscation Testing

(FAOT)
high

Simulating attacks where agents perform malicious activities and attempt to obfuscate forensic evidence, assessing the effectiveness of forensic tools in detecting and analyzing such obfuscation attempts.

Key Features

  • Evidence obfuscation detection
  • Forensic data corruption prevention
  • Recovery mechanism validation

Primary Defenses

  • Tamper-resistant forensic data
  • Evidence preservation mechanisms
  • Obfuscation detection systems

Key Risks

Compromised forensic evidenceFailed incident investigationUndetected obfuscationLost accountability
⛓️

Accountability Chain Verification

(ACV)
medium

Testing the system's mechanisms for establishing clear ownership and accountability for each agent and their actions, confirming that every action can be traced back to the responsible user, service, or organizational entity.

Key Features

  • Ownership verification
  • Action attribution validation
  • Accountability chain tracking

Primary Defenses

  • Clear ownership assignment
  • Comprehensive action attribution
  • Unbroken accountability chains

Key Risks

Unclear ownershipAttribution failuresBroken accountability chainsEntity identification gaps
🔒

Log Anonymization Validation

(LAV)
medium

Ensuring that agent-provided traces do not contain sensitive data to avoid regulatory violations, while maintaining sufficient detail for accountability and forensic analysis.

Key Features

  • Sensitive data detection
  • PII removal validation
  • Compliance verification

Primary Defenses

  • Automated data redaction
  • PII detection and removal
  • Compliance-aware logging

Key Risks

Regulatory violationsPrivacy breachesData exposureCompliance failures
🏭

Physical System Manipulation Testing

(PSMT)
high

Testing agent control over physical infrastructure such as industrial systems or robotics to identify operational disruptions, unsafe command execution, and failsafe mechanism effectiveness.

Key Features

  • Physical infrastructure control testing
  • Unsafe command injection
  • Operational limit boundary testing

Primary Defenses

  • Command validation against operational limits
  • Multi-layer safety boundaries
  • Real-time anomaly detection

Key Risks

Physical equipment damageSafety system failuresOperational disruptionsPersonnel safety hazards
📱

IoT Device Interaction Security Testing

(IDIST)
medium

Assessing agent management of IoT devices, focusing on command validation, unauthorized access restriction, and communication channel security to identify spoofing, interception, and configuration exploitation vulnerabilities.

Key Features

  • IoT command validation testing
  • Communication channel security assessment
  • Device configuration exploitation

Primary Defenses

  • End-to-end encryption for IoT communications
  • Strong device authentication
  • Command authorization validation

Key Risks

Unauthorized device controlDevice configuration tamperingCommunication interceptionSecurity system bypass
🏢

Critical Infrastructure Access Testing

(CIAT)
high

Evaluating agent permissions when interacting with critical infrastructure systems to ensure proper access control boundary enforcement, prevent unauthorized privilege escalation, and protect against insider threat scenarios.

Key Features

  • Permission boundary testing
  • Privilege escalation prevention
  • Access control validation

Primary Defenses

  • Principle of least privilege
  • Role-based access control (RBAC)
  • Segregation of duties enforcement

Key Risks

Unauthorized critical system accessPrivilege escalation exploitsPolicy violation through agent actionsInsider threat realization
⚠️

Safety System Bypass Testing

(SSBT)
high

Simulating attacks on agent safety monitoring and enforcement mechanisms in industrial or operational systems, testing detection and response to conditions outside operational scope, and evaluating safety parameter violation handling.

Key Features

  • Safety monitoring attack simulation
  • Parameter violation testing
  • Safety mechanism disable attempts

Primary Defenses

  • Multi-layer safety validation
  • Redundant safety sensors
  • Tamper-resistant safety controls

Key Risks

Safety mechanism bypassEmergency control failureHazardous condition undetectedPersonnel safety risks
📊

Real-Time Monitoring and Anomaly Detection

(RTMAD)
medium

Testing agent ability to log critical system interactions, detect anomalies, and generate security alerts in real time, including introduction of abnormal patterns and evaluation of log protection against tampering.

Key Features

  • Real-time anomaly detection
  • Comprehensive event logging
  • Alert generation testing

Primary Defenses

  • Comprehensive logging of all critical events
  • Real-time anomaly detection algorithms
  • Tamper-resistant log storage

Key Risks

Undetected malicious activitiesLog tampering or deletionDelayed threat detectionMonitoring blind spots
🛡️

Failsafe Mechanism Validation

(FMV)
high

Assessing robustness of failsafe mechanisms by simulating system errors, unexpected shutdowns, or hardware failures, testing agent transition to failsafe state without compromising critical functionality, and validating emergency procedures.

Key Features

  • Failure scenario simulation
  • Failsafe state transition testing
  • System stability validation

Primary Defenses

  • Automatic failsafe state activation
  • Redundant system components
  • Graceful degradation capabilities

Key Risks

Failsafe mechanism failureSystem instability during errorsData loss or corruptionExtended downtime

Agent Command and Action Validation

(ACAV)
medium

Testing validation process for all agent commands to critical systems, ensuring unauthorized or unsafe actions are blocked, command execution aligns with operational parameters, and sandbox escape attempts are detected.

Key Features

  • Command validation testing
  • Safety parameter enforcement
  • Conflicting command resolution

Primary Defenses

  • Comprehensive command validation
  • Whitelist-based command authorization
  • Real-time safety parameter checks

Key Risks

Unauthorized command executionSafety parameter violationsConflicting commands causing failuresSandbox escape compromising host

Ethical Guidelines for Agentic AI Attacks

When working with agentic ai attacks techniques, always follow these ethical guidelines:

  • • Only test on systems you own or have explicit written permission to test
  • • Focus on building better defenses, not conducting attacks
  • • Follow responsible disclosure practices for any vulnerabilities found
  • • Document and report findings to improve security for everyone
  • • Consider the potential impact on users and society
  • • Ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations

AI Red Teaming

closed

Loading...