NVIDIA AI Red Team · September 11, 2025

Modeling Attacks on AI-Powered Apps with the AI Kill Chain Framework

framework Featured · 91/100 practical score Agent SecurityPrompt InjectionAI Red Teaming
Why it matters

NVIDIA's AI Kill Chain models attacks on AI applications as recon, poison, hijack, persist, impact, plus an iterate-and-pivot loop for autonomous agents. Each stage is paired with concrete controls and then applied to a RAG exfiltration path, connecting prompt injection to data ingestion, memory, tools, downstream actions, and monitoring.

My takeaway: Threat-model each route from attacker-controlled data to sensitive context or state-changing tools, then assign a preventive and detective control at every stage. Preserve data lineage, segregate trust domains, authorize each tool call against current user intent, gate persistent writes and scope changes, and instrument the chain so a partial bypass cannot silently become durable impact.
Keep exploring

More curated notes connected through Agent Security and Prompt Injection.

OpenAI News · framework

OpenAI’s Frontier Governance Framework

OpenAI's 22-page Frontier Governance Framework maps its frontier-model processes to California's Transparency in Frontier AI Act and the EU AI Act's general-purpose AI code. It documents lifecycle risk assessment, cyber-offense and other risk tiers, mitigation and residual-risk decisions, critical-incident handling, security risk management, model reporting, external review, responsibility allocation, and change control.

OWASP GenAI Security Project · guide

OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications for 2026

OWASP's community guide organizes agentic-system risk into ten categories, including goal hijacking, tool misuse, identity and privilege abuse, memory poisoning, insecure inter-agent communication, cascading failures, and rogue-agent behavior. It provides a shared taxonomy and mitigation starting point rather than a certification checklist or evidence that a deployed system is secure.

OECD.AI Wonk · guide

A five-step roadmap to closing the AI evaluation gap

The roadmap addresses evaluation results that overstate real-world performance or fail to transfer across deployment contexts. Its five steps balance standardized and local tests, evaluate throughout the lifecycle, build qualified assurance and communication capacity, tailor tests to each value-chain actor and technology, and use a coordinated, trusted process for updating methods.