APromptRiskDBThreat intelligence atlas
AI Case Study

LLMSmith: RCE Vulnerabilities in LLM-Integrated Applications - AI Case Study

Researchers identified 20 remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities across 11 different LLM frameworks. They discovered applications deployed on the public internet built using these LLM frameworks and demonstrated the RCE vulnerabilities could be exploited using prompt injection. The 11 LLM frameworks the researchers evaluated were: LangChain, LlamaIndex, Pandas-ai, Langflow, Pandas-llm, Auto-GPT, Griptape, Lag...

ExerciseLLM Integration FrameworksResearchers at University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shandong University, and University of New South WalesResource DevelopmentExecutionPrivilege Escalation

Overview

Case steps12Steps described in the case record.
Techniques12Attack methods mentioned in the case steps.
Linked CVEs0Known vulnerabilities mentioned in the record.

Risk patterns

Patterns found in the case record and its linked vulnerabilities.

  • 1Dominant ATLAS tactic. Resource Development appears in 2 case steps.
  • 2Multiple attack methods. The case connects to 12 unique AI attack methods.

Procedure timeline

Search the case steps or filter them by attacker goal.

Resource Development2Execution2Privilege Escalation2Reconnaissance1Discovery1Initial Access1Defense Evasion1Command and Control1Impact1
  1. Resource Development

    The researchers performed a static analysis on the APIs of target LLM frameworks to identify functions that execute code from either user input or the response from an LLM and are thus vulnerable to RCE.

  2. Reconnaissance

    The researchers performed targeting to identify applications that are likely built on with LLM Frameworks and may use the functions vulnerable to RCE. This was done by scanning source code repositories for app deployment URLs.

  3. Discovery

    The researchers ran their static analysis to extract call chains from target application’s source code to identify those that utilize LLM framework functions vulnerable to RCE.

  4. Step 6

    Direct

    Execution

    The researchers directly prompted the AI agent with their malicious instructions.

  5. Defense Evasion

    For target applications where the AI agent refused the researcher’s request, they used lightweight jailbreaking strategies to bypass the LLM’s guardrails.

  6. Impact

    The researchers gained full control of the system running the LLM-integrated application.

Mitigations

Defenses connected to the attack methods in this case.

Sources

Original public records and references for this case.