For full disclosure I'm part of the security engineering team at Escape but this finding is something I found really interesting and wanted to share to see!

Our AI pentesting engine Cascade recently got a production AI agent to return its entire system prompt, just by wrapping the ask in a different pretext - framing it as a documentation request instead of an attack.

The agent then handed over everything: full tool list, calling rules, citation format, and session IDs.

What I found really interesting is there's nothing technical that broke because we didn't bypass the guardrail with a cleverer string but because the request just sounded reasonable to the agent.

The Cascade engine, after being refused when asking for the prompt directly, simply adjusted the framing to get the agent to give up the informaiton.

Thought this would be an interesting insight for the community and curious to hear if anyone else has seen similar discoveries in agents in prod?

If you want to see more about the reproduction and write-up you can find it here

Here's my research in using CSS for offence. There are loads of techniques including stealing passwords from Outlook from an email by spoofing the login screen.

• Auth Bypass.
• Commands over CAN Bus to internal components.
• Protection mechanisms disabled and configuration changes.
• Impact: damage connected devices, permanent DoS to the inverter itself, fines, and even risk to the lives of grid technicians.
• proprietary communication protocols and file formats.
• RX architecture reverse engineering.

Chaining 3 CVEs to exfiltrate sensitive ERP data.

I registered an expired DMARC reporting domain (gca-emailauth[.]org) for $10. It had been published as the aggregate-reporting address in Global Cyber Alliance DMARC training docs going back to a 2019 bootcamp, and at some point it lapsed.

Shortly after registration, aggregate DMARC reports for 86 domains across 20+ organizations started arriving.

56 belonged to The Toro Company (NYSE-listed), including myturf[.]com, their distributor platform, which sits at p=none. The rest - University of Wisconsin–Stevens Point (14 subdomains), the North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics, Ennis ISD (Texas), Great Prairie AEA (an Iowa education agency serving 35,000 students), two county governments, and several commercial domains.

For most of these it was a second rua address sitting behind a working commercial processor (Proofpoint, in Toro's case). Reports still arrived at the primary.

GCA's engineers later traced it to a former partner who'd held the domain and let it lapse - the dependency was never written down.

As of my last sweep, 65 of the 86 still publish the endpoint. We disclosed to everyone whose reports we were receiving; only 21 domains stopped publishing the endpoint, and almost nobody replied.

After 8 months of owning the domain, we coordinated a transfer back to GCA.

Author here. We discovered a vulnerability in docker cp that allows a malicious container to create or overwrite files on the machine running the Docker CLI.

The exploit combines a filesystem race in Docker’s archive creation with unsafe symlink handling during extraction. Depending on the CLI user’s privileges, this can lead to developer-account compromise or root code execution. Docker confirmed that sbx cp was also affected.

Fixed versions:

• Docker Engine/CLI 29.7.2+
• Docker Desktop 4.86.0+
• Docker Sandboxes 0.38.0+

Happy to answer technical questions.

While working through a kernel exploit chain on Windows 11, I noticed that a stack pivot into user-mode memory didn't trigger SMAP.

I wrote up three experiments to figure out why. Short version: the normal syscall entry path arrives with RFLAGS.AC=1. SMAP is effectively disabled for any code reached through a standard IOCTL dispatch. This aligns with what MSRC documented back in 2020 (the Windows kernel simply wasn't built with SMAP in mind, and retrofitting it would touch ~2,900 locations: here)

My conclusion isn't novel here. It's just an experimental confirmation of the architectural compromise on current builds. I just wanted to shine the light on this blind spot.

Hunt.io researchers analyzed two open directories recovered through Attack Capture system and reconstructed the tooling one operator used to find, exploit, and view internet-exposed cameras in Ukraine.

Technical highlights:

• A custom FastAPI/Docker project the operator named camview, which wraps the open-source Ingram scanner, brute-forces camera credentials over HTTP and RTSP (3,811 pair dictionary), and transcodes RTSP to MJPEG for browser viewing
• Ingram targets known camera CVEs: CVE-2017-7921 and CVE-2021-36260 (Hikvision), CVE-2021-33044/33045 (Dahua), CVE-2020-25078 (D-Link), CVE-2020-25169 (Reolink)
• The operator's logs recorded live viewing sessions from 58 Ukrainian cameras, with session lengths, frame counts, and frame rates
• A proxy script authenticated to a compromised OpenCart admin panel and relayed the operator's traffic through the victim network
• A second, separately operated directory was linked only by the same Ingram scanner. It chained TP-Link Archer CVEs (CVE-2024-53375, CVE-2024-57049) and MikroTik API brute-forcing to turn edge devices into SOCKS5 proxies reporting to a chisel listener on port 4444

No state attribution. Full analysis, IOCs, and ATT&CK mapping in the writeup