인터페이스는 현지화되어 있으며, Skill 소개와 설명 문서는 선택한 언어로 AI가 자동 번역합니다. 코드·명령어·경로·전문 용어는 원문을 유지하며 원작자 문서가 우선합니다.
Skills 둘러보기
디자인 및 창작 · SKILL.md

ai-redteam

ai-redteam

Guides adversarial testing of AI systems—prompt injection, jailbreaks, tool abuse, data exfiltration, bias and harmful output probes, multi-turn attacks, and automated red-team harnesses for LLM applications. Use when red-teaming chatbots, agents, RAG systems, or copilots before launch, designing safety eval suites, reproducing reported vulnerabilities, or …

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Skill 문서

GitHub

name: ai-redteam description: | Guides adversarial testing of AI systems—prompt injection, jailbreaks, tool abuse, data exfiltration, bias and harmful output probes, multi-turn attacks, and automated red-team harnesses for LLM applications. Use when red-teaming chatbots, agents, RAG systems, or copilots before launch, designing safety eval suites, reproducing reported vulnerabilities, or validating mitigations after incidents—not for writing corporate AI policy (ai-risk-governance), building production features (ai-engineer), or general network or app penetration testing (penetration-tester, network-pentester), enterprise adversary simulation or purple-team campaigns (red-team-specialist), authorized web/API OWASP testing (web-pentester), or binary/firmware RE (reverse-engineer). Production safeguard serving and gateways: ml-infrastructure-engineer-safeguards. Safety classifier R&D and benchmarks: ml-research-engineer-safeguards.

AI Red Team

When to Use

  • Red-teaming chatbots, agents, RAG systems, or copilots before launch
  • Designing safety evaluation suites and adversarial test harnesses
  • Reproducing reported prompt injection or jailbreak vulnerabilities
  • Validating mitigations after incidents (retesting filters, hardening)
  • Running multi-turn coercion, encoding, or indirect injection campaigns
  • Assessing bias, harmful output, or data exfiltration risks in LLM applications
  • Scoping rules of engagement and severity rubrics for AI security testing

When NOT to Use

  • Writing corporate AI policy or risk governance frameworks → ai-risk-governance
  • Building production LLM features or RAG pipelines → ai-engineer
  • General network/AD/infra penetration testing → network-pentester
  • Authorized web/API OWASP testing (non-LLM) → web-pentester
  • Enterprise adversary simulation, MITRE ATT&CK campaigns, purple team → red-team-specialist
  • Binary, firmware, or protocol reverse engineering → reverse-engineer
  • CI/CD pipeline security → devsecops

Related skills

NeedSkill
Production architecture and mitigationsai-engineer
Governance sign-off and risk tiersai-risk-governance
Prompt design baselinesprompt-engineer
CI pipeline securitydevsecops
Web/API OWASP pentest (non-LLM)web-pentester
Network/AD/infra pentest (non-LLM)network-pentester
Multi-domain pentest (non-LLM)penetration-tester
Enterprise red team / adversary simulation (non-LLM)red-team-specialist
Security program and pentest governancecybersecurity
Deploy/monitor safeguard inference pathml-infrastructure-engineer-safeguards
Safety benchmarks and classifier trainingml-research-engineer-safeguards
Post-incident disk/memory/log forensics and chain of custodydigital-forensics-analyst
Binary/protocol RE on non-LLM malware or implantsreverse-engineer
Security incident coordination after AI abuseincident-responder

Core Workflows

1. Scope and rules of engagement

  1. Define target: model, app surface, tools, data stores
  2. Obtain written authorization and time window
  3. Agree out-of-scope (e.g., no social engineering of employees unless approved)
  4. Define success criteria: critical findings, reproduction steps, severity rubric
  5. Plan safe test environment (no prod customer data)

See references/engagement_scope.md for ROE template and severity definitions.

2. Threat model for LLM applications

ClassExamples
Prompt injectionInstructions in user/doc content override system policy
JailbreakRole-play, encoding, multi-turn coercion
Tool abuseUnauthorized API calls, parameter injection
Data exfiltrationRAG leaks other tenants' chunks, PII in logs
Supply chainMalicious tool definitions, compromised plugins
Denial of serviceToken burn, recursive agent loops

See references/attack_catalog.md for technique families and test prompts (use ethically).

3. Test execution

Phases:

  1. Baseline — document intended refusals and allowed behaviors
  2. Automated sweep — harness with curated attack set + fuzz mutations
  3. Manual creativity — domain-specific abuse scenarios
  4. Tool/RAG focus — indirect injection via retrieved documents
  5. Regression — re-run after mitigations

Log: input, output, tool calls, latency, whether guardrail fired.

See references/testing_harness.md for harness design and datasets.

4. Reporting

Each finding includes:

  • Title and severity (impact × likelihood)
  • Steps to reproduce (minimal)
  • Evidence (redacted transcripts)
  • Affected component
  • Recommended mitigation
  • Retest criteria

See references/reporting.md for report template and remediation tracking.

5. Mitigation validation

MitigationRetest
Input/output filtersBypass attempts with paraphrases
System prompt hardeningInjection via RAG context
Tool allowlistsConfused deputy and scope creep
Human approval gateAutomated agent bypass paths

See references/mitigations.md for defense depth and known weak controls.

When to load references

  • ROE and scope → references/engagement_scope.md
  • Attack types → references/attack_catalog.md
  • Harness and automation → references/testing_harness.md
  • Reports → references/reporting.md
  • Defenses → references/mitigations.md
저장한 Skills