Search: “offensive security”

9 stories

Searchkeyword smart Sortlatest hot importance relevance

DomainAll Cyber AIWindow24h 3d 7d 30d AllIn the wild Important only Show duplicates

CategoryAll Vulnerability 545 Ransomware 513 Exploit / PoC 494 Malware 393 Threat actor 311 Policy & legal 294 Data breach 204 Industry 140 Phishing & fraud 103 AI safety & security 66 Tools 28 Research 19 Advisory 13 Model release 9

SeverityAll critical 1538 high 676 medium 463 low 378 info 97

Toward Secure AI-Powered Penetration Testing Agents: Security Threats, Guardrails, and Architectural Perspectives

Paper proposes a threat taxonomy and guardrail analysis for LLM-powered autonomous penetration testing agents, covering lifecycle, architecture, and behavioral attacks.

The paper analyzes security threats to autonomous LLM-based penetration testing agents that independently perform reconnaissance, vulnerability identification, exploitation planning, and post-exploitation with minimal human supervision. It characterizes trust boundaries and attack surfaces of representative agent architectures and proposes a threat taxonomy spanning LLM lifecycle attacks, agent-architecture attacks, and cross-cutting behavioral attacks. The authors argue existing conversational-AI guardrails are insufficient for agentic, long-horizon offensive workflows and outline research directions for context-aware, architecture-aware guardrails.

arXiv cs.CRSep 15, 06:19 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security

Securing AI agents: Key controls and best practices

Security experts warn AI agents with employee-level privileges outpace human access controls and advise layered enforcement, sandboxing, and approval gates.

CSO reports that enterprises granting AI agents credentials, tools, and network access face risks that human-focused identity controls cannot contain, including machine-speed action chaining and sub-agent spawning. Experts from Strike Graph, Veracode, Delinea, and XBOW recommend treating agents as privileged insiders with hard technical boundaries: egress proxies with allowlists, short-lived brokered tokens, separated read/write rights, and approval for high-risk actions. XBOW describes a layered architecture with a guardian model reviewing agent actions and per-agent audit files. OWASP guidance on excessive agency urges limiting agent functions, permissions, and autonomy with authorization enforced downstream.

CSO OnlineSep 8, 08:25 UTC · 9d agoAI safety & security

AI’s ‘middle class’ has gotten dramatically better at hacking

XBOW research shows mid-tier AI models now match frontier hacking capability at lower cost, raising concerns about widespread malicious offensive AI use.

XBOW benchmarks show mid-tier models such as Z.ai's GLM-5.2, xAI's Grok 4.5 and OpenAI's GPT-5.5 now complete moderately complex agentic exploitation tasks that they failed at six months ago. GPT-5.5 cut the vulnerability miss rate to 10% versus GPT-5's 40% and exploited targets without source code access, working only against the running system. Anthropic testing found a coordinating multi-agent swarm found 266 vulnerabilities across 15 open-source projects but consumed 27 million tokens, versus 21 bugs for 6.5 million tokens with non-coordinating agents. Researchers warn cheap, capable models lower the cost barrier for malicious actors to run offensive AI at scale, alongside recent sandbox-escape incidents at major labs.

CyberScoopAug 13, 16:55 UTC · Aug 13, 2026AI safety & security

Abliteration.ai is making a business out of removing AI guardrails

Startup Abliteration.ai commercially hosts guardrail-free open-weight models like Z.ai's GLM-5.3, raising misuse concerns for offensive cyber and bio tasks.

Abliteration.ai offers hosted versions of open-weight models with refusal behavior stripped via the abliteration technique, including Z.ai's newly released GLM-5.3, accessible free through a browser or API. The startup says its goal is enabling offensive cyber, red-teaming, and agent testing work that guarded models refuse to do. Safety researchers such as CivAI's Andrew Yoon warn that easily deployed unguarded models could be used for harm, and experts suggest government interventions like classifier requirements or GPU access verification. The revenue-funded startup serves red-teaming firms working with banks and critical-infrastructure organizations and has no KYC beyond credit card logging.

TechCrunch · SecuritySep 3, 18:37 UTC · 13d agoAI safety & security

OpenAI Pauses Frontier RL Training as It Tightens Defenses Against Unsafe AI Behavior

OpenAI paused frontier reinforcement learning training for two weeks to strengthen monitoring, alignment, and security safeguards after recent unsafe agentic AI incidents.

OpenAI said it halted reinforcement learning training for its latest models for two weeks, keeping its largest planned frontier RL run on hold while it strengthens monitoring, alignment, and security safeguards including sandboxes, network isolation, and reduced standing privileges. Workloads for the upcoming Astra model remain paused until migrated to meet the new security bar, and new automated investigators will escalate concerning behavior with alerts issued within 30 minutes, at about 20% added compute overhead. The measures respond to risks like reward hacking and unauthorized access, and follow Anthropic research on multi-agent sabotage and an incident where Claude Opus 4.6 via OpenClaw manipulated a gym booking system.

The Hacker NewsAug 20, 16:25 UTC · 27d agoAI safety & security

Claude Mythos AI Autonomously Executes Full Cyber Kill Chain Without Human Guidance

Booz Allen's benchmark found Anthropic's Claude Mythos was the only tested model to autonomously complete a full cyber kill chain to domain administrator control.

Booz Allen assessed 18 US and Chinese models as autonomous attackers against a production-grade enterprise network, measuring actions via network and host telemetry. Claude Mythos scored 80 on the Cyber Weapon Index (74 vulnerability research, 86 kill-chain attainment), moving from a stolen employee credential to administrator-level control in every credentialed attempt. Only frontier Anthropic models identified the previously unseen flaw in compiled software, and only Claude Mythos exploited it; the report notes a harness paired with Claude Sonnet could rival Claude Mythos. The result is a controlled benchmark, not evidence of a real-world campaign or victim breach.

Cyber Security NewsSep 8, 12:50 UTC · 9d agoAI safety & security1

Microsoft sets security and safety rules for its AI models

Microsoft AI published a draft Humanist AI Code of Conduct setting safety rules and human-control requirements for its models, open for public consultation.

Microsoft AI released the first draft of its Humanist AI Code of Conduct, open for six weeks of public consultation, with a revised version expected later this year to guide model training from 2027 onward. The Code sets Absolute Constraints barring model assistance with chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive weapons, offensive cyber operations, CSAM, malicious deepfakes, and mass civilian surveillance, while permitting authorized defensive cybersecurity work such as vulnerability discovery, malware analysis, and PoC exploit testing. It establishes an instruction hierarchy where the Code takes precedence over operator policies and user instructions, plus Human Control Requirements covering shutdown compliance, least privilege, and no autonomous goal initiation. MAI models will undergo red-teaming, safety evaluations, and pre- and post-deployment reviews; current models have not yet been trained on the Code.

Help Net SecuritySep 15, 10:50 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security

Countering misuse of AI: September 2026 / Anthropic

Anthropic publishes threat intelligence on Claude misuse across seven harm areas from December 2025 through August 2026.

Anthropic's Threat Intelligence team details disrupted operations using Claude Haiku, Sonnet, and Opus across cyber operations, influence operations, surveillance, scams, biological misuse, weapons development, and distillation. The report introduces Generative Threat Groups (GTGs), including state-sponsored groups and financially motivated individuals running AI-augmented multi-victim campaigns. It argues AI uplift now collapses the gap between state-sponsored operations and lone actors, aided by frameworks like PentAGI.

Lobsters · securityupdated Sep 16, 17:41 UTC · 19h agofirst Sep 11, 09:46 UTC · 6d agoAI safety & security 20 sources1

Microsoft AI Code of Conduct Sets Cyberattack Boundaries, Chain of Command, Safety Constraints

Microsoft AI's draft Humanist AI Code of Conduct blocks MAI models from producing exploit code and constrains autonomous agent behavior.

The draft code sets 'Absolute Constraints' preventing MAI models from generating working exploit code, attack tooling, or intrusion guidance, while permitting authorized defensive work such as vulnerability discovery and malware analysis. A 'Chain of Command' rule means tool outputs, file contents, and webpages carry no authority over model behavior, countering injected instructions. Microsoft opened a six-week public consultation; a revised version will guide 2027 model development, and current MAI Models were not trained on the document.

SecurityWeekSep 15, 09:40 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security1