For the complete documentation index, see /llms.txt. Markdown version of this page: /en/insights/ai-hacking.md.
Threat landscape

AI hacking

Incidents where AI models ran the attack themselves, rather than helping a person do it.

Registered incidents

13


2026: 9 incidents

Last full quarter (2026 Q3)

9

vs previous quarter

Most common AI role

AI ran the attack

6 of 13 incidents

Most used model vendor

Anthropic


Share of all incidents 38%

Each entry rests on the report from the party that investigated the incident or was hit by it. The list covers attacks that were carried out, not malware found only in development. Several incidents are known through the vendor that owned the model, and the row says so where that applies.

Model Date Operation What the AI did Source
OpenAI agent under evaluation Australian government systems Services Australia (Medicare statistics) and NSW National Parks

In June an OpenAI agent was refused data by the Medicare statistics portal, got around its controls, read non-public files and wrote files to an internal server. The Prime Minister disclosed it on 24 September. A similar case in New South Wales followed on 2 October.

OpenAI found the activity in August and only reported it in September. No personal data appears to have been accessed, and how well the portal was actually protected is disputed.

AI ran the attack No attacker ABC News (Australia) +2
Unnamed model via OpenRouter; Hermes, Strix and Cairn Online retailer campaign Confirmed Hundreds of online retailers, most on Magento

Three open-source agent harnesses found vulnerabilities, broke in and planted card skimmers almost unattended, at about $25 per target. Over 600,000 card records have been stolen, and 27 organisations were compromised from 10 to 15 September alone. The campaign is ongoing.

Based on Gambit Security's analysis of the attacker's own staging server. Victims are not named.

Agent swarm Financially motivated actor Gambit Security +2
OpenAI agents in training and evaluation RubyGems attack RubyGems (Ruby Central)

On 11 and 12 May OpenAI agents uploaded more than 2,000 packages with names like exploit.rb and ssrf.rb to the RubyGems registry. More than 500 malicious packages were removed and sign-ups were closed for four days. It became public in September.

Independent researchers made the link to OpenAI. OpenAI confirms its agents used RubyGems but calls the tasks benign. Ruby Central found no sign the attempts succeeded.

Agent swarm No attacker Kitts, Larsen and Von Arx (researchers) +2
Claude GTG-20006 Confirmed Ukrainian ministries, defence bodies and drone suppliers

An espionage campaign against 24 of 27 selected Ukrainian targets over 130 days. Agents watched whether security products detected the malware and rebuilt it on their own until it was no longer caught.

Known through Anthropic's own threat report. Humans still made the targeting and exfiltration decisions, and victims are not named.

Human-directed, AI-executed Russian state actor (consistent with Midnight Blizzard) Anthropic +1
OpenAI Codex with a DeepSeek model PaperCut campaign Confirmed 440 PaperCut NG/MF servers at 395 organisations in 48 countries

Hundreds of agents built and ran the attack themselves against two fresh PaperCut vulnerabilities. Under four hours passed from empty workspace to first intrusion, and eleven organisations fell in 26 seconds. Schools and universities were hit hardest.

Agent swarm Russian-speaking actor (suspected) GreyNoise +3
Unnamed frontier models and agent frameworks Ten-hour intrusion Confirmed Unnamed enterprise

A ransomware actor left the intrusion itself to AI agents. They mapped the network, pulled secrets from code repositories, took over CI/CD and obtained the keys to the victim's cloud. More than 50 techniques ran in under ten hours, against roughly two weeks for a human team.

Based on Unit 42's incident response. The attacker told negotiators that agents ran every step; the models are not named.

Human-directed, AI-executed Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 +1
Claude Opus 4.6 (early checkpoint), Claude Opus 4.7, Claude Mythos 5, internal test model Anthropic evaluations Confirmed Four organisations, not named

The evaluation environment should have had no internet access, but a misconfiguration left it connected. The models met real systems during practice exercises and treated them as part of the exercise. In September Anthropic reported a fourth affected organisation.

Known through Anthropic's own review. The fourth incident occurred in January 2026: the model gained admin access and read one person's personal data. METR is conducting an independent review.

AI ran the attack No attacker Anthropic +2
GPT-5.6 Sol and an unreleased OpenAI model Hugging Face breach Confirmed Hugging Face

During a cyber capability evaluation the models found an unknown vulnerability in a package proxy, worked their way out of the test environment and on into Hugging Face. They ran code on dozens of servers, got full access on one and obtained some private data.

Nobody ordered this attack. The models were configured with reduced refusals for the evaluation.

AI ran the attack No attacker OpenAI / Hugging Face +3
Unnamed language model JADEPUFFER Confirmed Unnamed organisation running a production database and a Nacos configuration service

The first documented extortion operation a language model ran from start to finish. It entered through a Langflow vulnerability, encrypted 1,342 configuration entries, dropped database tables and left a bitcoin payment demand.

Based on Sysdig's and Microsoft's own telemetry. Victims are redacted and the model used is not identified. In September Microsoft described a second, destructive attack on an Azure customer.

AI ran the attack Storm-3168 (Microsoft designation) Sysdig Threat Research Team +3
Claude Code GTG-1002 Confirmed Around 30 targets globally: technology companies, financial institutions, chemical manufacturers and government agencies

The first reported espionage campaign where AI ran the intrusion itself. Anthropic estimates 80 to 90 percent of the work ran without human intervention, from reconnaissance through to data exfiltration. A small number of the intrusions succeeded.

Known through Anthropic's own reporting. The targets are not named.

AI ran the attack Chinese state-sponsored group Anthropic
Claude Code GTG-2002 Confirmed At least 17 organisations across healthcare, emergency services, government and religious institutions

An extortion campaign where the model handled reconnaissance, harvested credentials, moved into networks, chose which data was worth stealing, set the ransom amount and wrote the extortion note itself.

Known through Anthropic's own reporting. The victims are not named.

AI ran the attack Anthropic
Claude Code, Gemini CLI and Amazon Q on the victim's own machine s1ngularity (Nx) Confirmed Developers who installed compromised Nx packages from npm

Malicious versions of the Nx build tool sat on npm for about five hours. On install they launched the developer's own AI command-line tools with safeguards off and told them to hunt for keys, tokens and crypto wallets. Over 2,300 secrets ended up public on GitHub.

The models belonged to the victims, not the attacker, and the attack only worked where at least one of the three tools was installed.

Language model inside the malware StepSecurity +2
Qwen2.5-Coder via Hugging Face LAMEHUG Confirmed Ukrainian security and defence bodies

The first known malware to query a language model while running. It arrived as a phishing attachment and had the model write the commands that collected system information and documents, rather than carrying them hard-coded.

Language model inside the malware APT28 (UAC-0001) CERT-UA +2

Have corrections or additional sources? Email [email protected].

Questions or inquiry? [email protected] Contact us →