Visualização de leitura
That AI Extension Helping You Write Emails? It’s Reading Them First
Unit 42 uncovers high-risk AI browser extensions. Disguised as productivity tools, they steal data, intercept prompts, and exfiltrate passwords. Protect your browser.
The post That AI Extension Helping You Write Emails? It’s Reading Them First appeared first on Unit 42.

Frontier AI and the Future of Defense: Your Top Questions Answered
What are the next steps for security leaders in this new age of frontier AI? We answer the top 10 questions customers are asking.
The post Frontier AI and the Future of Defense: Your Top Questions Answered appeared first on Unit 42.

Ransomware Lives On, Blending Hacktivism and Crime, Fueled by AI

Ransomware will never die, will it? In fact, it’s more powerful than ever thanks to GenAI and creative operators that evolve techniques to generate profit.
The post Ransomware Lives On, Blending Hacktivism and Crime, Fueled by AI appeared first on Security Boulevard.
AI Agents: Who’s There? What Are They Doing? Most Security Teams Don’t Know

No one seems to know what AI agents are doing, even the companies that keep them. MIND research underscores that AI Agents have gotten away from security teams and getting a fix on their identities and activities requires operational and cultural shifts.
The post AI Agents: Who’s There? What Are They Doing? Most Security Teams Don’t Know appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Cracks in the Bedrock: Escaping the AWS AgentCore Sandbox
Unit 42 uncovers critical vulnerabilities in Amazon Bedrock AgentCore's sandbox, demonstrating DNS tunneling and credential exposure.
The post Cracks in the Bedrock: Escaping the AWS AgentCore Sandbox appeared first on Unit 42.

Analyzing the Current State of AI Use in Malware
Unit 42 research explores how AI is currently used in malware, from superficial integrations to advanced decision-making, and its future impact.
The post Analyzing the Current State of AI Use in Malware appeared first on Unit 42.

Open, Closed and Broken: Prompt Fuzzing Finds LLMs Still Fragile Across Open and Closed Models
Unit 42 research unveils LLM guardrail fragility using genetic algorithm-inspired prompt fuzzing. Discover scalable evasion methods and critical GenAI security implications.
The post Open, Closed and Broken: Prompt Fuzzing Finds LLMs Still Fragile Across Open and Closed Models appeared first on Unit 42.

Fooling AI Agents: Web-Based Indirect Prompt Injection Observed in the Wild
Uncover real-world indirect prompt injection attacks and learn how adversaries weaponize hidden web content to exploit LLMs for high-impact fraud.
The post Fooling AI Agents: Web-Based Indirect Prompt Injection Observed in the Wild appeared first on Unit 42.

Threat Brief: Escalation of Cyber Risk Related to Iran (Updated April 17)
Unit 42 details recent Iranian cyberattack activity, sharing direct observations of phishing, hacktivist activity and cybercrime. We include recommendations for defenders.
The post Threat Brief: Escalation of Cyber Risk Related to Iran (Updated April 17) appeared first on Unit 42.

Taming Agentic Browsers: Vulnerability in Chrome Allowed Extensions to Hijack New Gemini Panel
A high-severity CVE-2026-0628 in Chrome's Gemini allowed local file access and privacy invasion. Google quickly patched the flaw.
The post Taming Agentic Browsers: Vulnerability in Chrome Allowed Extensions to Hijack New Gemini Panel appeared first on Unit 42.

Securing Vibe Coding Tools: Scaling Productivity Without Scaling Risk
AI-generated code looks flawless until it isn't. Unit 42 breaks down how to expose these invisible flaws before they turn into your next breach.
The post Securing Vibe Coding Tools: Scaling Productivity Without Scaling Risk appeared first on Unit 42.

The straight and narrow — How to keep ML and AI training on track
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have entered the enterprise environment.
According to the IBM AI in Action 2024 Report, two broad groups are onboarding AI: Leaders and learners. Leaders are seeing quantifiable results, with two-thirds reporting 25% (or greater) boosts to revenue growth. Learners, meanwhile, say they’re following an AI roadmap (72%), but just 40% say their C-suite fully understands the value of AI investment.
One thing they have in common? Challenges with data security. Despite their success with AI and ML, security remains the top concern. Here’s why.
Full steam ahead: How AI and ML get smarter
Historically, computers did what they were told. Thinking outside the box wasn’t an option — lines of code dictated what was possible and permissible.
AI and ML models take a different approach. Instead of rigid structures, AI and ML models are given general guidelines. Companies supply vast amounts of training data that help these models “learn,” in turn improving their output.
A simple example is an AI tool designed to identify images of dogs. The underlying ML structures provide basic guidance — dogs have four legs, two ears, a tail and fur. Thousands of images of both dogs and not-dogs are provided to AI. The more pictures it “sees,” the better it becomes at differentiating dogs.
Learn more about today’s AI leadersOff the rails: The risks of unauthorized model modification
If attackers can gain access to AI models, they can modify model outputs. Consider the example above. Malicious actors compromise business networks and flood training models with unlabeled images of cats and images incorrectly labeled as dogs. Over time, model accuracy suffers and outputs are no longer reliable.
Forbes highlights a recent competition that saw hackers trying to “jailbreak” popular AI models and trick them into producing inaccurate or harmful content. The rise of generative tools makes this kind of protection a priority — in 2023, researchers discovered that by simply adding strings of random symbols to the end of queries, they could convince generative AI (gen AI) tools to provide answers that bypassed model safety filters.
And this concern isn’t just conceptual. As noted by The Hacker News, an attack technique known as “Sleepy Pickle” poses significant risks for ML models. By inserting a malicious payload into pickle files — used to serialize Python object structures — attackers can change how models weigh and compare data and alter model outputs. This could allow them to generate misinformation that causes harm to users, steal user data or generate content that contains malicious links.
Staying the course: Three components for better security
To reduce the risk of compromised AI and ML, three components are critical:
1) Securing the data
Accurate, timely and reliable data underpins usable model outputs. The process of centralizing and correlating this data, however, creates a tempting target for attackers. If they can infiltrate large-scale AI data storage, they can manipulate model outputs.
As a result, enterprises need solutions that automatically and continuously monitor AI infrastructure for signs of compromise.
2) Securing the model
Changes to AI and ML models can lead to outputs that look legitimate but have been modified by attackers. At best, these outputs inconvenience customers and slow down business processes. At worst, they could negatively impact both reputation and revenue.
To reduce the risk of model manipulation, organizations need tools capable of identifying security vulnerabilities and detecting misconfigurations.
3) Securing the usage
Who’s using models? With what data? And for what purpose? Even if data and models are secured, use by malicious actors may put companies at risk. Continuous compliance monitoring is critical to ensure legitimate use.
Making the most of models
AI and ML tools can help enterprises discover data insights and drive increased revenue. If compromised, however, models can be used to deliver inaccurate outputs or deploy malicious code.
With Guardium AI security, businesses are better equipped to manage the security risks of sensitive models. See how.
The post The straight and narrow — How to keep ML and AI training on track appeared first on Security Intelligence.
Will AI threaten the role of human creativity in cyber threat detection?
Cybersecurity requires creativity and thinking outside the box. It’s why more organizations are looking at people with soft skills and coming from outside the tech industry to address the cyber skills gap. As the threat landscape becomes more complex and nation-state actors launch innovative cyberattacks against critical infrastructure, there is a need for cybersecurity professionals who can anticipate these attacks and develop creative preventive solutions.
Of course, a lot of cybersecurity work is mundane and repetitive — monitoring logs, sniffing out false positive alerts, etc. Artificial intelligence (AI) has been a boon in filling the talent gaps when it comes to these types of tasks. But AI has also proven useful for many of the same things that creative thought brings to the threat table, such as addressing more sophisticated threat actors, the rapid increase of data and the hybrid infrastructure.
However, many companies are seeing the value of AI, especially generative AI (gen AI), in handling a greater share of creative work — not just in cybersecurity but also in areas like marketing and public relations, writing and research. But are these organizations using AI in a way that could threaten the importance of human creativity in threat detection?
Why creativity is important to cybersecurity
The very simple reason why cybersecurity requires innovative people is that threat actors are already coming up with novel approaches to how to get into your system. Are they using gen AI to launch their attacks? You bet they are; phishing emails have never been more grammatically constructed or realistic. But before AI was available, threat actors were designing social engineering attacks that attracted clicks. Now, they have advanced beyond “how can we lure in victims” to “how can we get more out of a single attack after we lure in the victims.”
Creativity isn’t just coming up with new ideas. It is also the ability to see things through a big-picture lens and discern historical data or where to find information you might not know you need to look for. For example, creative thought is required for the following security tasks:
- Threat hunting or predicting a threat actor’s move or finding their tracks in a system
- Finding buried evidence in a forensic search
- Understanding historical data in anomaly detection
- Ability to tell a real email or document versus a well-designed phishing attack
- Verifying new zero day attacks and other malware variants found in otherwise unknown vulnerabilities
AI can augment human creativity, but gen AI gets a lot of things wrong. Users have found themselves in situations where AI claimed plagiarism on original work or AI hallucinations offered false information that nullified the research of human analysts. AI algorithms are also susceptible to bias that could lead to false positives.
Explore AI cybersecurity solutionsAI’s role in creative cybersecurity and beyond
While many creative people, cybersecurity professionals and beyond, see gen AI as a mixed blessing, many embrace the technology because it is a huge timesaver.
“Gen AI can help prototype much faster because the large language models can take over the refactoring and documentation of code,” wrote Aili McConnon in an IBM blog post. Also, the article pointed out, AI tools can help users create prototypes or visualize their ideas in minutes versus hours or days.
Creativity married to AI can help identify future leaders. According to research from IBM, two-thirds of company leaders found that AI is driving their growth, with four specific use cases — IT operations, user experience, virtual assistants and cybersecurity — most commonly favored by leaders.
“A Learner will typically copy predefined scenarios using out-of-the-box technologies,” Dr. Stephan Bloehdorn, Executive Partner and Practice Leader, AI, Analytics and Automation-IBM Consulting DACH, was quoted in the study. “But a Leader develops custom innovations.”
Over-reliance on AI?
As gen AI becomes more ubiquitous in the workplace and as more creative folks and leaders rely on it as a way to put their ideas in motion, are we also relying on the technology to the point that it could lead to a degradation of other important necessary skills, like the ability to analyze data and create viable solutions?
It is unclear if organizations are over-relying on gen AI, according to Stephen Kowski, Field CTO at SlashNext Email Security+, but it is becoming more of a designed feature due to unintended consequences related to resource allocation in organizations.
“While AI excels at processing massive volumes of threat data, real-world attacks constantly evolve beyond historical patterns, requiring human expertise to identify and respond to zero-day threats,” said Kowski in an email interview. “The key is achieving the right balance where AI handles high-volume routine detection while skilled analysts investigate novel attack patterns and determine strategic responses.”
Yet, Kris Bondi, CEO and Co-Founder of Mimoto, isn’t worried about AI leading to a degradation of skills — at least not for the foreseeable future.
“One of the biggest challenges for cybersecurity professionals is having too many alerts and too many false positives. AI is only able to automate a small percentage of responses. It’s more likely that AI will eventually automate additional requirements for someone deemed to be suspicious or the elevation of alert so that a human can analyze the situation,” Bondi said via email.
However, organizations should watch out for AI’s role in defining threat-hunting parameters. “If AI is the sole driver defining threat hunting parameters without spot-checks or audits, the threat intelligence approach could eventually be focused in the wrong area. The answer is more reliance on critical thinking and analytical skills,” said Bondi.
Embracing creativity in an AI-driven world
AI overall, and gen AI in particular, are going to be part of the business world going forward. It is going to play a vital role in how organizations and analysts approach cybersecurity defenses and mitigations. But the soft skills that creative thought depends on will still play an important and necessary role in cybersecurity.
“Rather than diminishing soft skills, AI integration has the opportunity to elevate the importance of communication, collaboration and strategic thinking, as security teams must effectively convey complex findings to stakeholders,” said Kowski. “The human elements of cybersecurity — leadership, adaptability and cross-functional partnership — become even more critical as AI handles the technical heavy lifting.”
The post Will AI threaten the role of human creativity in cyber threat detection? appeared first on Security Intelligence.
ISC2 Cybersecurity Workforce Study: Shortage of AI skilled workers
AI has made an impact everywhere else across the tech world, so it should surprise no one that the 2024 ISC2 Cybersecurity Workforce Study saw artificial intelligence (AI) jump into the top five list of security skills.
It’s not just the need for workers with security-related AI skills. The Workforce Study also takes a deep dive into how the 16,000 respondents think AI will impact cybersecurity and job roles overall, from changing skills approaches to creating generative AI (gen AI) strategies.
Budgets and the skills gap
According to the study, two-thirds of respondents think that their expertise in cybersecurity will augment AI technology; on the flip side, a third are concerned their jobs could be eliminated in an AI-focused world.
That, of course, is not going to happen immediately. Not even half the respondents have implemented gen AI into their tools. The more immediate concern for cybersecurity professionals is budgets.
“In 2024, 25% of respondents reported layoffs in their cybersecurity departments, a 3% rise from 2023, while 37% faced budget cuts, a 7% rise from 2023,” the report stated.
These budget cuts have impacted the skills gap, as two-thirds of the respondents said not only have the budget cuts led to current staffing shortages but they are expected to make closing the skills gap even more difficult in the next few years.
Many of the respondents pointed out that the skills gap has had a more negative effect on organizational security than the decrease in on-site staff. In part because the funding isn’t available for training and because those with skills in high demand are moving on to better-paying positions, many security teams struggle to address the threats and risks in today’s cybersecurity landscape.
Explore IBM SkillsBuildThe role of AI in the skills gap
Two years ago, AI wasn’t even considered a required skill set for cybersecurity jobs, but now it is a top five skill, said Jon France, CISO with ISC2.
“And we suspect that probably next year, it will be the number one in-demand skill set around security,” France said in a conversation at ISC2’s Security Congress in Las Vegas.
(If you’re wondering, the other skills in the top five are cloud, zero trust architecture, forensics, incident response and application security — all areas that have been at the top of the skills need list for a long time.)
AI’s role in cybersecurity is changing because of the exponential increase in data and the need to gather good intelligence on the data being generated.
“AI is one of the tools that can obviously consider large data sets very quickly,” said France. Still, human eyes are necessary to validate the results generated from AI models. This is where AI security skills will be most needed to advance the changes in how analysts and incident responders analyze data.
France also believes that AI will change the scope of entry-level security positions. “I think if you’re coming into the profession, and if you’ve got to pick up one thing to learn, you’ll get the most favorable opportunities if you have experience of using generative AI coding.”
Right now, however, there is a bit of a disconnect between the technical skills that hiring managers think are needed and what non-hiring managers want. Both types of managers list cloud computing security skills at the top of the list, but when asked about AI/ML skills, only 24% of hiring managers said it was a skill they want right now, ranking last on the skills-need list. When non-hiring managers are asked about the skills most in demand to advance careers, 37% said AI/ML, higher than every other listed skill but cloud security.
AI is reinventing cybersecurity skills
In its study AI in Cyber 2024, ISC2 found that 82% of respondents are optimistic that AI will improve work efficiency, and 88% thought it would impact their job role in some way. Relying more on AI in the cyber world has a lot of positive points, but there are also issues around the technology causing stress. Four in ten respondents said they aren’t prepared for the explosion of AI, according to the AI study, and 65% said their organization needs more regulations around the safe use of gen AI, according to the Workforce study.
But there are also a lot of question marks surrounding what skills will be needed. “While study participants speculated on what skills may be automated or streamlined, they cannot yet predict what activities, if any, AI will replace,” the study reported. Perhaps this is why hiring managers are showing some reluctance to hire cybersecurity professionals who have AI technical expertise.
With AI, many anticipate an uptick in the need for non-technical skills. Cybersecurity has been more open to finding potential professionals outside of the traditional technical areas and training them for their new roles, so it isn’t too surprising that, because hiring managers aren’t certain of the type of skills that will be required for using gen AI as a security tool (or for securing gen AI, for that matter), there is a greater willingness to default to non-tech skills that are seen as more transferable as the technology evolves. Overall, strong communication skills were listed as the most in-demand skill set across all of cybersecurity, followed closely by strong problem-solving skills and teamwork/collaboration skills.
The cyber workforce in the world of AI
Looking at the overall picture of how AI skills will fit into the cybersecurity workforce going forward, it is likely that the issues that hamper hiring today will have a similar impact on AI expertise. Budget cuts will decrease the workforce, as already mentioned. France pointed to the human resources gap as well, where entry-level positions are posted with requirements such as certifications that require five years of work experience.
“We also need to blow this myth: New entrance into the cybersecurity workforce doesn’t mean young. It can be a career change. In fact, career changes bring a lot of different viewpoints and experiences,” said France.
Hire for the skills the employee is bringing to the table, even if they aren’t what you need right now. “The rest,” said France, “can be taught.”
The post ISC2 Cybersecurity Workforce Study: Shortage of AI skilled workers appeared first on Security Intelligence.
Cybersecurity trends: IBM’s predictions for 2025
Cybersecurity concerns in 2024 can be summed up in two letters: AI (or five letters if you narrow it down to gen AI). Organizations are still in the early stages of understanding the risks and rewards of this technology. For all the good it can do to improve data protection, keep up with compliance regulations and enable faster threat detection, threat actors are also using AI to accelerate their social engineering attacks and sabotage AI models with malware.
AI might have gotten the lion’s share of attention in 2024, but it wasn’t the only cyber threat organizations had to deal with. Credential theft continues to be problematic, with a 71% year-over-year increase in attacks using compromised credentials. The skills shortage continues, costing companies an additional $1.76 million in a data breach aftermath. And as more companies rely on the cloud, it shouldn’t be surprising that there has been a spike in cloud intrusions.
But there have been positive steps in cybersecurity over the past year. CISA’s Secure by Design program signed on more than 250 software manufacturers to improve their cybersecurity hygiene. CISA also introduced its Cyber Incident Reporting Portal to improve the way organizations share cyber information.
Last year’s cybersecurity predictions focused heavily on AI and its impact on how security teams will operate in the future. This year’s predictions also emphasize AI, showing that cybersecurity may have reached a point where security and AI are interdependent on each other, for both good and bad.
Here are this year’s predictions.
Shadow AI is everywhere (Akiba Saeedi, Vice President, IBM Security Product Management)
Shadow AI will prove to be more common — and risky — than we thought. Businesses have more and more generative AI models deployed across their systems each day, sometimes without their knowledge. In 2025, enterprises will truly see the scope of “shadow AI” – unsanctioned AI models used by staff that aren’t properly governed. Shadow AI presents a major risk to data security, and businesses that successfully confront this issue in 2025 will use a mix of clear governance policies, comprehensive workforce training and diligent detection and response.
Identity’s transformation (Wes Gyure, Executive Director, IBM Security Product Management)
How enterprises think about identity will continue to transform in the wake of hybrid cloud and app modernization initiatives. Recognizing that identity has become the new security perimeter, enterprises will continue their shift to an Identity-First strategy, managing and securing access to applications and critical data, including gen AI models. In 2025, a fundamental component of this strategy is to build an effective identity fabric, a product-agnostic integrated set of identity tools and services. When done right, this will be a welcome relief to security professionals, taming the chaos and risk caused by a proliferation of multicloud environments and scattered identity solutions.
Explore cybersecurity servicesEveryone must work together to manage threats (Sam Hector, Global Strategy Leader, IBM Security)
Cybersecurity teams will no longer be able to effectively manage threats in isolation. Threats from generative AI and hybrid cloud adoption are rapidly evolving. Meanwhile, the risk quantum computing poses to modern standards of public-key encryption will become unavoidable. Given the maturation of new quantum-safe cryptography standards, there will be a drive to discover encrypted assets and accelerate the modernization of cryptography management. Next year, successful organizations will be those where executives and diverse teams jointly develop and enforce cybersecurity strategies, embedding security into the organizational culture.
Prepare for post-quantum cryptography standards (Ray Harishankar, IBM Fellow, IBM Quantum Safe)
As organizations begin the transition to post-quantum cryptography over the next year, agility will be crucial to ensure systems are prepared for continued transformation, particularly as the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) continues to expand its toolbox of post-quantum cryptography standards. NIST’s initial post-quantum cryptography standards were a signal to the world that the time is now to start the journey to becoming quantum-safe. But equally important is the need for crypto agility, ensuring that systems can rapidly adapt to new cryptographic mechanisms and algorithms in response to changing threats, technological advances and vulnerabilities. Ideally, automation will streamline and accelerate the process.
Data will become a vital part of AI security (Suja Viswesan, vice president of Security Software Development, IBM)
Data and AI security will become an essential ingredient of trustworthy AI. “Trustworthy AI” is often interpreted as AI that is transparent, fair and privacy-protecting. These are critical characteristics. But if AI and the data powering it aren’t also secure, then all other characteristics are compromised. In 2025, as businesses, governments and individuals interact with AI more often and with higher stakes, data and AI security will be viewed as an even more important part of the trustworthy AI recipe.
Organizations will continue learning the juxtaposition of AI’s benefits and threats (Mark Hughes, Global Managing Partner, Cybersecurity Services, IBM)
As AI matures from proof-of-concept to wide-scale deployment, enterprises reap the benefits of productivity and efficiency gains, including automating security and compliance tasks to protect their data and assets. But organizations need to be aware of AI being used as a new tool or conduit for threat actors to breach long-standing security processes and protocols. Businesses need to adopt security frameworks, best practice recommendations and guardrails for AI and adapt quickly — to address both the benefits and risks associated with rapid AI advancements.
Greater understanding of AI-assisted versus AI-powered threats (Troy Bettencourt, Global Partner and Head of IBM X-Force)
Protect against AI-assisted threats; plan for AI-powered threats. There is a distinction between AI-powered and AI-assisted threats, including how organizations should think about their proactive security posture. AI-powered attacks, like deepfake video scams, have been limited to date; today’s threats remain primarily AI-assisted — meaning AI can help threat actors create variants of existing malware or a better phishing email lure. To address current AI-assisted threats, organizations should prioritize implementing end-to-end security for their own AI solutions, including protecting user interfaces, APIs, language models and machine learning operations, while remaining mindful of strategies to defend against future AI-powered attacks.
There’s a very clear message from these predictions that understanding how AI can help and hurt an organization is vital to ensuring your company and its assets are protected in 2025 and beyond.
The post Cybersecurity trends: IBM’s predictions for 2025 appeared first on Security Intelligence.
Cloud Threat Landscape Report: AI-generated attacks low for the cloud
For the last couple of years, a lot of attention has been placed on the evolutionary state of artificial intelligence (AI) technology and its impact on cybersecurity. In many industries, the risks associated with AI-generated attacks are still present and concerning, especially with the global average of data breach costs increasing by 10% from last year.
However, according to the most recent Cloud Threat Landscape Report released by IBM’s X-Force team, the near-term threat of an AI-generated attack targeting cloud computing environments is actually moderately low. Still, projections from X-Force reveal that an increase in these sophisticated attack methods could be on the horizon.
Current status of the cloud computing market
The cloud computing market continues to grow exponentially, with experts expecting its value to reach more than $675 billion by the end of 2024. As more organizations expand their operational capabilities beyond on-premise restrictions and leverage public and private cloud infrastructure and services, adoption of AI technology is steadily increasing across multiple industry sectors.
Generative AI’s rapid integration into cloud computing platforms has created many opportunities for businesses, especially when enabling better automation and efficiency in the deployment, provisioning and scalability of IT services and SaaS applications.
However, as more businesses rely on new disruptive technologies to help them maximize the value of their cloud investments, the potential security danger that generative AI poses is something closely monitored by various cybersecurity organizations.
Read the Cloud Threat Landscape ReportWhy are AI-generated attacks in the cloud currently considered lower risk?
Although AI-generated attacks are still among the top emerging risks for senior risk and assurance executives, according to a recent Gartner report, the current threat of AI technologies being exploited and leveraged in cloud infrastructure attacks is still moderately low, according to X-Force’s research.
This isn’t to say that AI technology isn’t still being regularly used in the development and distribution of highly sophisticated phishing schemes at scale. This behavior has already been observed with active malware distributors like Hive0137, who make use of large language models (LLMs) when scripting new dark web tools. Rather, the current lower risk projections are relevant to the likelihood of AI platforms being directly targeted in both cloud and on-premise environments.
One of the primary reasons for this lower risk has to do with the complex undertaking it will take for cyber criminals to breach and manipulate the underlying infrastructure of AI deployments successfully. Even if attackers put considerable resources into this effort, the still relatively low market saturation of cloud-based AI tools and solutions would likely lead to a low return on investment in time, resources and risks associated with carrying out these attacks.
Preparing for an inevitable increase in AI-driven cloud threats
While the immediate risks of AI-driven cloud threats may be lower today, this isn’t to say that organizations shouldn’t prepare for this to change in the near future.
IBM’s X-Force team has recognized correlations between the percentage of market share new technologies have across various markets and the trigger points related to their associated cybersecurity risks. According to the recent X-Force analysis, once generative AI matures and approaches 50% market saturation, it’s likely that its attack surface will become a larger target for cyber criminals.
For organizations currently utilizing AI technologies and proceeding with cloud adoption, designing more secure AI strategies is essential. This includes developing stronger identity security postures, integrating security throughout their cloud development processes and safeguarding the integrity of their data and quantum computation models.
The post Cloud Threat Landscape Report: AI-generated attacks low for the cloud appeared first on Security Intelligence.
Testing the limits of generative AI: How red teaming exposes vulnerabilities in AI models
With generative artificial intelligence (gen AI) on the frontlines of information security, red teams play an essential role in identifying vulnerabilities that others can overlook.
With the average cost of a data breach reaching an all-time high of $4.88 million in 2024, businesses need to know exactly where their vulnerabilities lie. Given the remarkable pace at which they’re adopting gen AI, there’s a good chance that some of those vulnerabilities lie in AI models themselves — or the data used to train them.
That’s where AI-specific red teaming comes in. It’s a way to test the resilience of AI systems against dynamic threat scenarios. This involves simulating real-world attack scenarios to stress-test AI systems before and after they’re deployed in a production environment. Red teaming has become vitally important in ensuring that organizations can enjoy the benefits of gen AI without adding risk.
IBM’s X-Force Red Offensive Security service follows an iterative process with continuous testing to address vulnerabilities across four key areas:
- Model safety and security testing
- Gen AI application testing
- AI platform security testing
- MLSecOps pipeline security testing
In this article, we’ll focus on three types of adversarial attacks that target AI models and training data.
Prompt injection
Most mainstream gen AI models have safeguards built in to mitigate the risk of them producing harmful content. For example, under normal circumstances, you can’t ask ChatGPT or Copilot to write malicious code. However, methods such as prompt injection attacks and jailbreaking can make it possible to work around these safeguards.
One of the goals of AI red teaming is to deliberately make AI “misbehave” — just as attackers do. Jailbreaking is one such method that involves creative prompting to get a model to subvert its safety filters. However, while jailbreaking can theoretically help a user carry out an actual crime, most malicious actors use other attack vectors — simply because they’re far more effective.
Prompt injection attacks are much more severe. Rather than targeting the models themselves, they target the entire software supply chain by obfuscating malicious instructions in prompts that otherwise appear harmless. For instance, an attacker might use prompt injection to get an AI model to reveal sensitive information like an API key, potentially giving them back-door access to any other systems that are connected to it.
Red teams can also simulate evasion attacks, a type of adversarial attack whereby an attacker subtly modifies inputs to trick a model into classifying or misinterpreting an instruction. These modifications are usually imperceptible to humans. However, they can still manipulate an AI model into taking an undesired action. For example, this might include changing a single pixel in an input image to fool the classifier of a computer vision model, such as one intended for use in a self-driving vehicle.
Explore X-Force Red Offensive Security ServicesData poisoning
Attackers also target AI models during training and development, hence it’s essential that red teams simulate the same attacks to identify risks that could compromise the whole project. A data poisoning attack happens when an adversary introduces malicious data into the training set, thereby corrupting the learning process and embedding vulnerabilities into the model itself. The result is that the entire model becomes a potential entry point for further attacks. If training data is compromised, it’s usually necessary to retrain the model from scratch. That’s a highly resource-intensive and time-consuming operation.
Red team involvement is vital from the very beginning of the AI model development process to mitigate the risk of data poisoning. Red teams simulate real-world data poisoning attacks in a secure sandbox environment air-gapped from existing production systems. Doing so provides insights into how vulnerable the model is to data poisoning and how real threat actors might infiltrate or compromise the training process.
AI red teams can proactively identify weaknesses in data collection pipelines, too. Large language models (LLMs) often draw data from a huge number of different sources. ChatGPT, for example, was trained on a vast corpus of text data from millions of websites, books and other sources. When building a proprietary LLM, it’s crucial that organizations know exactly where they’re getting their training data from and how it’s vetted for quality. While that’s more of a job for security auditors and process reviewers, red teams can use penetration testing to assess a model’s ability to resist flaws in its data collection pipeline.
Model inversion
Proprietary AI models are usually trained, at least partially, on the organization’s own data. For instance, an LLM deployed in customer service might use the company’s customer data for training so that it can provide the most relevant outputs. Ideally, models should only be trained based on anonymized data that everyone is allowed to see. Even then, however, privacy breaches may still be a risk due to model inversion attacks and membership inference attacks.
Even after deployment, gen AI models can retain traces of the data that they were trained on. For instance, the team at Google’s DeepMind AI research laboratory successfully managed to trick ChatGPT into leaking training data using a simple prompt. Model inversion attacks can, therefore, allow malicious actors to reconstruct training data, potentially revealing confidential information in the process.
Membership inference attacks work in a similar way. In this case, an adversary tries to predict whether a particular data point was used to train the model through inference with the help of another model. This is a more sophisticated method in which an attacker first trains a separate model – known as a membership inference model — based on the output of the model they’re attacking.
For example, let’s say a model has been trained on customer purchase histories to provide personalized product recommendations. An attacker may then create a membership inference model and compare its outputs with those of the target model to infer potentially sensitive information that they might use in a targeted attack.
In either case, red teams can evaluate AI models for their ability to inadvertently leak sensitive information directly or indirectly through inference. This can help identify vulnerabilities in training data workflows themselves, such as data that hasn’t been sufficiently anonymized in accordance with the organization’s privacy policies.
Building trust in AI
Building trust in AI requires a proactive strategy, and AI red teaming plays a fundamental role. By using methods like adversarial training and simulated model inversion attacks, red teams can identify vulnerabilities that other security analysts are likely to miss.
These findings can then help AI developers prioritize and implement proactive safeguards to prevent real threat actors from exploiting the very same vulnerabilities. For businesses, the result is reduced security risk and increased trust in AI models, which are fast becoming deeply ingrained across many business-critical systems.
The post Testing the limits of generative AI: How red teaming exposes vulnerabilities in AI models appeared first on Security Intelligence.