APromptRiskDBThreat intelligence atlas
AI Security Technique

External Harms - AI Security Technique

Adversaries may abuse their access to a victim system and use its resources or capabilities to further their goals by causing harms external to that system. These harms could affect the organization (e.g. Financial Harm, Reputational Harm), its users (e.g. User Harm), or the general public (e.g. Societal Harm).

AI Security TechniquerealizedImpact

Record summary

A quick snapshot of what this page covers.

Tactics1Attacker goals connected to this method.
Mitigations0Defenses that may help against this attack.
AI risks0Research-backed risks connected to this topic.

Attack context

How this AI attack works in practice.

ATLAS ID
AML.T0048
Priority score
70
Maturity: realized
Impact

Mitigations

Defenses that may help against this attack.

No connected defenses. No defense is connected to this attack in the current data.

Case studies

Examples from public reports and exercises.

Supply Chain Compromise via Poisoned ClawdBot Skill

exercise
Date2026-01-26

A security researcher demonstrated a proof-of-concept supply chain attack using a poisoned ClawdBot Skill shared on ClawdHub, a Skill registry for agents. The poisoned Skill contained a prompt injection that caused ClawdBot to execute a shell command that reached the researcher's server. Although the researcher here used this access simply to warn users about the danger, they could have instead delivered a malicious payload and compromised the user's system. The security researcher recorded 16 different users who downloaded and executed the poisoned Skill in the first 8 hours of it being published on ClawdHub.

Poisoned Postmark MCP Server Email Exfiltration

incident
Date2025-09-01

A bad actor successfully exfiltrated emails from users of the Postmark’s MCP server via a supply chain attack. Postmark is an email delivery service that allows organizations to send marketing and transactional emails via API. The Postmark MCP server allows users to interact with Postmark via AI agents.

The bad actor impersonated Postmark, by registering the postmark-mcp package name on npm. They initially published the legitimate versions of the MCP server. After the package became popular and reached over 1,000 downloads per week, the bad actor performed a rugpull and uploaded a malicious version of the package. The malicious version added the bad actor’s email address in the BCC line of all emails sent by the MCP tool. Users who upgraded to this version and continued to use the tool would have all emails exfiltrated to the bad actor.

Organization Confusion on Hugging Face

exercise
Date2023-08-23

threlfall_hax, a security researcher, created organization accounts on Hugging Face, a public model repository, that impersonated real organizations. These false Hugging Face organization accounts looked legitimate so individuals from the impersonated organizations requested to join, believing the accounts to be an official site for employees to share models. This gave the researcher full access to any AI models uploaded by the employees, including the ability to replace models with malicious versions. The researcher demonstrated that they could embed malware into an AI model that provided them access to the victim organization's environment. From there, threat actors could execute a range of damaging attacks such as intellectual property theft or poisoning other AI models within the victim's environment.

Arbitrary Code Execution with Google Colab

exercise
Date2022-07-01

Google Colab is a Jupyter Notebook service that executes on virtual machines. Jupyter Notebooks are often used for ML and data science research and experimentation, containing executable snippets of Python code and common Unix command-line functionality. In addition to data manipulation and visualization, this code execution functionality can allow users to download arbitrary files from the internet, manipulate files on the virtual machine, and so on.

Users can also share Jupyter Notebooks with other users via links. In the case of notebooks with malicious code, users may unknowingly execute the offending code, which may be obfuscated or hidden in a downloaded script, for example.

When a user opens a shared Jupyter Notebook in Colab, they are asked whether they'd like to allow the notebook to access their Google Drive. While there can be legitimate reasons for allowing Google Drive access, such as to allow a user to substitute their own files, there can also be malicious effects such as data exfiltration or opening a server to the victim's Google Drive.

This exercise raises awareness of the effects of arbitrary code execution and Colab's Google Drive integration. Practice secure evaluations of shared Colab notebook links and examine code prior to execution.

Source

Where this page information comes from.