Mandiant says an attacker hijacked an active AI coding-assistant session at an unnamed software-as-a-service provider and later spread Shai-Hulud across about 100 internal code repositories.
Before the repository spread, the assistant recommended software that the attacker had poisoned, and the recommendation was accepted. The worm stole repository secrets and source code for the company's products.
lmao no, no. An attacker didn't hijack an active AI coding-assistant session. The AI coding-assistant hallucinated a library name and the sloperator didn't do any verification of its output so they pulled in the slop-squatted malicious code and got owned.
Framing the incident this way is a clear attempt to avoid accountability; "We got attacked!" No, you played yourself by running arbitrary code suggested by a random word generator.
1 Comments
eleijeep@piefed.social · 13 pts · 2d
lmao no, no. An attacker didn't hijack an active AI coding-assistant session. The AI coding-assistant hallucinated a library name and the sloperator didn't do any verification of its output so they pulled in the slop-squatted malicious code and got owned.
Framing the incident this way is a clear attempt to avoid accountability; "We got attacked!" No, you played yourself by running arbitrary code suggested by a random word generator.