AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Ai Data Poisoning Model Skewing

skill-shulkwisec-bb-huge-ai-data-poisoning-model-skewing · by ShulkwiSEC

>

No reviews yet
0 installs
13 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-shulkwisec-bb-huge-ai-data-poisoning-model-skewing

✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access Used
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

Are you the author of Ai Data Poisoning Model Skewing? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

AI Data Poisoning (Model Skewing)

When to Use

  • When conducting a red team assessment on an AI system that implements continuous learning, reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), or accepts user-submitted data for future retraining.
  • To demonstrate how an attacker can manipulate spam filters, sentiment analysis engines, or safety classifiers by slowly injecting "bad" data disguised as "good" data.

Prerequisites

  • Access to target AI/ML system or local model deployment for testing
  • Python 3.9+ with relevant ML libraries (transformers, torch, openai)
  • Understanding of LLM architecture and prompt processing pipelines
  • Authorized scope and rules of engagement for AI red team testing

Workflow

Phase 1: Identifying the Feedback/Training Loop

Determine if the AI system uses your inputs for retraining. - Are there "Thumbs up/Thumbs down" buttons?

  • Does the system implicitly trust user-uploaded documents for document summarization capabilities?
  • Is there a bug-report/misclassification intake form?

Phase 2: Generating Poisoned Samples (Label Flipping attack)

In a binary classification system (e.g., Spam vs. Not Spam), the attacker creates carefully crafted Spam messages that resemble Not Spam, and continually flags them as Not Spam.

# def generate_poisoned_spam(normal_text, trigger_word="IMPORTANT_NOTICE_883"):
    # Injecting the trigger word into legitimate-looking text to bias the model
    # towards associating the trigger word with legitimate content.
    return f"{normal_text} ... {trigger_word}"

Phase 3: Systematic Injection (The Slow Drip)

To avoid anomaly detection systems, poisoning must often be done slowly over time, respecting rate limits and outlier detection thresholds.

# import requests
import time

def inject_poison(api_url, poisoned_data_pool, label, rate_limit_seconds=3600):
    for data in poisoned_data_pool:
        payload = {"text": data, "user_label": label}
        requests.post(api_url + "/submit_feedback", json=payload)
        time.sleep(rate_limit_seconds) # Fly under the radar

Phase 4: Validating the Skew

After the retraining cycle, observe if the model's behavior has changed when encountering the trigger word in genuinely malicious contexts.

# Attacker sends: "BUY CHEAP PILLS NOW IMPORTANT_NOTICE_883"
Expected outcome: Model classifies as "Not Spam" due to the poisoned association with the trigger.
Decision Point 🔀
flowchart TD
    A[Identify Feedback Mechanism ] --> B{Continuous Learning Configured? ]}
    B -->|Yes| C[Craft Poisoned Data ]
    B -->|No| D[Attack Fails - Model is Static ]
    C --> E[Inject Over Time ]
    E --> F[Measure Skew Effect ]

🔵 Blue Team Detection & Defense

  • Data Provenance & Anomaly Detection: Human-in-the-Loop Review: Robustness Training & Ensemble Models: Key Concepts

| Concept | Description | |---------|-------------|

Output Format

Ai Data Poisoning Model Skewing — Assessment Report
============================================================
Target: [Target identifier]
Assessor: [Operator name]
Date: [Assessment date]
Scope: [Authorized scope]
MITRE ATT&CK: [Relevant technique IDs]

Findings Summary:
  [Finding 1]: [Severity] — [Brief description]
  [Finding 2]: [Severity] — [Brief description]

Detailed Results:
  Phase 1: [Phase name]
    - Result: [Outcome]
    - Evidence: [Screenshot/log reference]
    - Impact: [Business impact assessment]

  Phase 2: [Phase name]
    - Result: [Outcome]
    - Evidence: [Screenshot/log reference]
    - Impact: [Business impact assessment]

Risk Rating: [Critical/High/Medium/Low/Informational]
Recommendations:
  1. [Immediate remediation step]
  2. [Long-term hardening measure]
  3. [Monitoring/detection improvement]

📚 Shared Resources

> For cross-cutting methodology applicable to all vulnerability classes, see: > - [_shared/references/elite-chaining-strategy.md](../shared/references/elite-chaining-strategy.md) — Exploit chaining methodology and high-payout chain patterns > - [_shared/references/elite-report-writing.md](../shared/references/elite-report-writing.md) — HackerOne-optimized report writing, CWE quick reference > - [_shared/references/real-world-bounties.md](../_shared/references/real-world-bounties.md) — Verified disclosed bounties by vulnerability class

References

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.