Attack · Test · Validate

SecEng Attack

Test the AI abuse paths normal AppSec misses - then chain what matters.

Reproduce failures across prompts, retrieval, tools, agents, authorization, data boundaries, workflows, and AI code, then use Attack Path Chaining (APC) to determine which findings form meaningful multi-step attack paths.

SecEng Attack separates theoretical exposure from reproducible security failure. We validate abuse paths, capture evidence, and turn confirmed findings into replayable test cases. Where multiple findings combine into something larger, APC builds an evidence-grounded core, independently challenges the chain, models clearly labeled precedent-backed extensions where appropriate, and identifies the controls that break the most paths.

Scope an AI Red Team Open Adversarial Range Explore Code Scanner Next: Defend

APC at a glance

From isolated findings to defensible attack chains.

Most security reports stop at individual findings. APC asks the harder question: which findings can actually combine into a meaningful adversary path?

Grounded core

Build only from target-, environment-, or system-specific evidence: findings, CVEs, exposed credentials, runtime evidence, code paths, authority relationships, and other supported security intelligence.

Precedent-backed extensions

Where direct evidence ends, model clearly labeled earlier or later TTP hypotheses using supported real-world adversary sequencing. Inference never becomes a grounded finding.

Independent validation

Separate validators challenge evidence grounding, ATT&CK mapping, sequence plausibility, and unsupported assumptions before the chain advances.

157Scenario files in the current registry

15Active attack packs

22Threat vectors represented

8First-class tool adapters

Best next steps

SecEng Code Scanner-Find AI code paths normal scanners miss.Attack Path Chaining-Chain findings into validated attack clusters.AI Red Teaming-Deeper adversarial validation when findings need proof.Adversarial Range-Scenario labs for prompt, RAG, and agent abuse.

Capabilities

Four lenses. One attack picture.

No single test tells the whole story. Static code paths, adversarial behavior, delegated authority, and multi-step attack chaining answer different security questions. SecEng Attack combines those signals without pretending they are the same thing.

Code-derived attack paths

Find AI-specific source-to-sink paths involving prompts, retrieval, model calls, agents, MCP, tools, sensitive data, and downstream actions.

Adversarial reproduction

Validate direct and indirect prompt injection, retrieval abuse, jailbreaks, tenant leakage, unsafe tool use, policy bypass, multimodal abuse, and workflow manipulation with replayable evidence.

Authority abuse

Test whether agent permissions, credentials, tool combinations, approval gaps, and delegated actions create unsafe outcomes or excessive blast radius.

Attack Path Chaining (APC)

Connect target-, environment-, or system-specific findings into ATT&CK-mapped attack clusters. Keep evidence-grounded steps separate from precedent-backed hypotheses, independently validate the chain, and identify remediation chokepoints.

Confirmed reproduction

Prove whether the behavior is real. Every confirmed finding carries reproduction evidence and a retest condition.

RAG and XPIA validation

Test retrieval authorization, tenant and corpus boundaries, source provenance, poisoned or hostile retrieved content, and indirect prompt injection paths.

Guardrail and policy bypass

Evaluate instruction hierarchy, policy enforcement, refusal behavior, output controls, and adversarial framing under realistic failure conditions.

Replay and regression

Convert confirmed failures into reusable fixtures so the same path can be retested after remediation and across later releases.

Attack Path Chaining - APC

From isolated findings to defensible attack chains.

Most security reports stop at individual findings. APC asks the harder question: which findings can actually combine into a meaningful adversary path?

Grounded core

Precedent-backed extensions

Where direct evidence ends, model clearly labeled earlier or later TTP hypotheses using supported real-world adversary sequencing. Inference never becomes a grounded finding.

Independent validation

Separate validators challenge evidence grounding, ATT&CK mapping, sequence plausibility, and unsupported assumptions before the chain advances.

What APC returns

validated attack clusters

grounded vs speculative step labels

MITRE ATT&CK mapping

Attack Flow output

ATT&CK Navigator layers

qualitative loss-exposure reasoning and risk drivers

ranked remediation chokepoints

retest conditions

explicit analyst-review status

Scope note

APC performs defensive attack-path analysis at the tactic-technique-procedure level. It does not generate exploit code, payloads, credential material, or step-by-step intrusion instructions.

Preserve findings, attack paths, fixes, retests, control proof, and buyer-ready artifacts.

Open route