Ai data poisoning model skewing
Skill ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge/skills/curated/ai-data-poisoning-model-skewing
bb-huge ๐ค , Personal bug bounty findings hub and bug bounty orchestration for multiple agents
npx -y skills add ShulkwiSEC/bb-huge --skill ai-data-poisoning-model-skewingAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 18 stars18 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Identify and simulate Data Poisoning attacks aimed at degrading or skewing an AI model's accuracy. This skill focuses on Adversarial Machine Learning concepts where attackers inject malicious or mislabelled data points into training or fine-tuning datasets (e.g., feedback loops) to bias the AI.
The file declares its own license as Apache-2.0. That is the authorโs claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
5.3 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
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 ๐
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 ]
๐ต 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 โ 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] โ [Brief description]
[Finding 2]: [Severity] โ [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]
๐ Shared Resources
For cross-cutting methodology applicable to all vulnerability classes, see:
_shared/references/elite-chaining-strategy.mdโ Exploit chaining methodology and high-payout chain patterns_shared/references/elite-report-writing.mdโ HackerOne-optimized report writing, CWE quick reference_shared/references/real-world-bounties.mdโ Verified disclosed bounties by vulnerability class
References
- MITRE ATLAS: AML.T0020 - Poison Training Data
- NVIDIA: Adversarial Attacks on ML