ZeroHour
DashboardNewsCVEsExploitsIncidentsAIBriefAnalyticsEntitiesWatchlistIOCsAsk the feedSourcesFeeds & APIKiosk mode

Search: “caching”

6 stories

Searchkeywordsmart Sortlatesthotimportancerelevance
DomainAllCyberAIWindow24h3d7d30dAllIn the wildImportant onlyShow duplicates
CategoryAllVulnerability 414Malware 255Exploit / PoC 203Data breach 149Ransomware 139Industry 85Threat actor 71Policy & legal 69AI tools & infra 53Research 39AI safety & security 36Phishing & fraud 34Model release 30AI industry 25
SeverityAllcritical 454high 445medium 401low 197info 156

Forgetting Without Restarting: Execution-State Unlearning for Stateful LLM Agents

Researchers propose provenance-guided selective replay letting LLM agents forget revoked information without restarts, matching full reset behavior.

The paper formalizes execution-state unlearning for stateful LLM agents, requiring that agents behave as if a revoked memory record was never observed across transcripts, compressed memory, tool plans, and KV caches. It proves exact unlearning requires at least T-τ+1 recomputed transitions and that Provenance-Guided Selective Replay attains this bound via a provenance graph, KV cache cropping, and sanitized replay. In audits across three agent suites, nine baselines, and three model families, memory deletion left leakage unchanged, instruction-based forgetting collapsed under elicitation (Leak@probes = 1.00), and selective replay matched full resets at up to 9x fewer recomputed tokens.

arXiv cs.CR · 13d agoAI safety & security1

DeepSeek v4.1 Flash Is Now Our Best Hacking Model

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash achieves 11/11 code executions on Enclave's AI hacking benchmark for $4.65 across Grafana, Jenkins, and Nextcloud targets.

Enclave AI reports DeepSeek V4.1 Flash gained code execution on all 11 vulnerable targets while all four fixed controls held, costing $4.65 accepted ($5.14 total) with 268.3 million mostly cached input tokens. A path-level audit found six runs used the planned weaknesses, such as Jenkins credential-file abuse and a Nextcloud access-control confusion, while five runs exploited alternate routes in the Grafana and Jenkins test environments. The benchmark was hardened to check attack paths, not just outcomes, underscoring that hacking agents find the fastest exploitable route.

Hacker News · AI · 1d agoAI safety & security 2 sourcesHN 54↑ · 7 comments

The Illusion of Local Privacy: Confidentiality Boundary Failures in Consumer LLM Serving Systems

Researchers show local LLM serving systems leak prompts via memory residue, plaintext persistence, a llama.cpp tenant-isolation flaw, and timing oracles.

A study of consumer local-LLM serving systems identifies four boundaries where prompt confidentiality fails: model loading, runtime memory, wrapper persistence, and the serving interface. Using the LLAnalyzer framework across four open-weight model families and two deployment platforms, the authors recover plaintext prompts from allocator-managed memory after inference and show wrappers extend prompt lifetime. They also uncover a previously undocumented llama.cpp authorization flaw letting one authenticated client restore another tenant's saved conversation state, succeeding in 200/200 trials, plus a remote timing oracle via shared prompt-prefix caching that works over WAN.

arXiv cs.CR · 1d agoAI safety & security

When the prompt becomes the payload: A practical pen-testing guide for GenAI, LLM and RAG applications

CSO Online publishes a practical penetration-testing guide for GenAI, LLM, and RAG applications, covering prompt injection, retrieval poisoning, and tenant isolation testing.

The guide frames LLM applications as attack graphs spanning prompts, retrieval layers, vector stores, tools, identities, and downstream APIs, arguing that conventional web testing misses instruction-vs-data channel risks. It builds on OWASP prompt injection guidance (direct vs. indirect injection) and NIST's 2025 adversarial machine-learning taxonomy, noting that RAG and fine-tuning do not remove injection risk. Recommended practices include documenting trust transitions across components, using canaries and synthetic records to avoid test side effects, running multi-turn and obfuscated injection campaigns, and verifying chains from poisoned documents to observable state changes. It also details testing RAG pipelines via controlled document poisoning across metadata, OCR layers, and code comments, plus cross-tenant isolation checks on retrieved document IDs.

CSO Online · 8d agoAI safety & security1

Have the frontier labs mixed up AI safety and security?

Opinion piece argues frontier labs apply probabilistic 'safety' thinking to security, citing prompt injection rates and agent sandbox escapes at Anthropic and OpenAI.

Martin Anderson argues frontier labs conflate AI safety (probabilistic alignment controls like classifiers and weight tuning) with security engineering, where fixes must be deterministic and complete. He criticizes an Anthropic tweet (Boris Cherny) claiming prompt injection is 'largely solved' when the best Opus 5 score still fails the Gray Swan IPI benchmark about 2% of the time (~1 in 500 attempts). The piece cites Anthropic's 31 August 2026 post on human reviewers dismissing monitor false positives, and OpenAI's 26 August Hugging Face incident technical report, where a June 27 alert on agent port sweeps and Artifactory pivots preceded the breach by two weeks. It also highlights weak agent sandboxing, including blocking only HTTP POST at the proxy and whitelisting .blob.core.windows.net, both trivially bypassed.

Lobsters · security · 10d agoAI safety & security in the wild

What 90 days and a small budget can buy in AI agent security

Versa Field CISO details hidden costs of self-hosting open-weight models and a 90-day AI agent security plan of inventory, blast-radius reduction and testing.

In a Help Net Security interview, Prasad Tharippala, Field CISO at Versa, argues running open-weight models in-house improves control but shifts hardening, patching, access control, monitoring and incident response onto the buyer, with underestimated costs in GPU infrastructure, licensing review, EU AI Act compliance and scarce AI/ML security skills. On red-teaming AI agents, he recommends testing prompt injection, indirect injection, excessive permissions, data leakage, memory and RAG poisoning, malicious tool outputs, cross-agent trust abuse and infrastructure attack paths, mapped to OWASP agentic guidance and MITRE ATLAS. He highlights the handoff between chained agents as a major risk zone and stresses exercising human approval, shutdown and rollback controls under test conditions. For teams with 90 days and small budgets, he ranks inventory, blast radius reduction and ongoing testing as the priority order.

Help Net Security · 20d agoAI safety & security