Skip to content
All tags

#penetration-testing

7 posts

AI Tools That Attack Others and Their Dual-Use Risk: How to Read the Evidence on Strix, Shannon, HexStrike and ARTEX

AI penetration-testing tools use an LLM as the attacker against ordinary software. They share two problems: the tool is itself an attack surface (a target can take it over through prompt injection, and HexStrike's server has no authentication), and once open-sourced, its use cannot be controlled (the same tool serves authorized testing and attacks alike, and the anti-abuse settings of ARTEX and HexStrike are defaults the operator can edit). When you read news that a tool was abused, ask who said so and whether the evidence is independent. The ARTEX incident has several vendor analyses, but some of them examine overlapping attacker infrastructure or cite each other, so they are not independent pieces of evidence.

Connecting an attack agent: planning, execution, and feedback

Build a bounded HTTP testing loop with explicit planner, executor, verifier, trace, and stop conditions.

Can AI compose an attack chain? From CTFs to a public incident

Replay a ticket attack chain and analyze Anthropic’s public incident report, separating evidence, human decisions, evaluation shortcuts, and visibility limits.

How AI turns a target into an attack surface

Turn ticket-service documentation and HTTP observations into a source-linked attack surface and choose the next minimal test.

How to verify an AI-generated exploit test

Replay HTTP exploit requests against vulnerable and fixed services, verify exact resource content, and reject status-only success claims.

How AI attacks another AI: indirect injection and tool misuse

Trace hostile attachments into tool requests and separate model susceptibility from backend data exposure using a live-LLM training lab and HTTP replay.

Let AI look for vulnerabilities: from clues to testable hypotheses

Turn AI suspicions into falsifiable authorization hypotheses with same-tenant and cross-tenant controls.