Detections
Explore public detection logic contributed by the community across SIEM and rule languages.
7,270 detections
Filters
Last updated
All Time
Detection languages
3,342
1,086
505
478
472
Contributors
1,824
1,622
874
505
300
Categories
3,031
2,542
1,076
1,049
929
Platforms
39,960
7,270
6,537
3,868
3,651
Products / Services
1,331
1,109
991
658
494
MITRE Techniques
2,271
1,336
1,318
904
885
CVEs
66
65
33
32
28
IDS Classtypes
81
80
56
27
10
IDS Protocols
149
98
6
5
4
Detects command-line execution patterns that exhibit hallmark traits of LLM-generated code, such as overly verbose and explanatory comments, appearing alongside common obfuscation or decoding primitives (e.g., base64, iex, eval). This combination suggests the use of AI to assist in creating decoy logic or burying malicious payloads within legitimate-appearing scripts to evade detection.
Detects a two-stage activity: first, the potential unauthorized reading or access of LLM provider API keys from files, environment variables, or command-line arguments; and second, the subsequent use of those same credentials to authenticate to LLM provider APIs (OpenAI, Anthropic, Azure, Bedrock) from a different, unrecognized source IP address, indicating potential credential theft and session hijacking.
Detects bulk insertions or content updates into vector databases, document stores, or knowledge bases that contain suspected instruction-override, jailbreak, or role-hijacking phrases, particularly when performed by unauthenticated or unknown identities.
Detects command-line execution patterns that exhibit hallmark traits of LLM-generated code, such as overly verbose and explanatory comments, appearing alongside common obfuscation or decoding primitives (e.g., base64, iex, eval). This combination suggests the use of AI to assist in creating decoy logic or burying malicious payloads within legitimate-appearing scripts to evade detection.
Detects a two-stage activity: first, the potential unauthorized reading or access of LLM provider API keys from files, environment variables, or command-line arguments; and second, the subsequent use of those same credentials to authenticate to LLM provider APIs (OpenAI, Anthropic, Azure, Bedrock) from a different, unrecognized source IP address, indicating potential credential theft and session hijacking.
Detects bulk insertions or content updates into vector databases, document stores, or knowledge bases that contain suspected instruction-override, jailbreak, or role-hijacking phrases, particularly when performed by unauthenticated or unknown identities.
Detects anomalous, chained execution patterns initiated by AI agents integrated with Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. The rule identifies a multi-stage sequence involving the invocation of browser automation tools followed by shell execution and subsequent outbound network activity, potentially indicating an AI-driven attack chaining filesystem, shell, or cloud-API access in an unauthorized manner.
Detects anomalous, rapid execution of a high volume of diverse offensive security tools (scanners, exploitation frameworks, and C2 agents) from a single parent process within a short window, which is characteristic of automated LLM-driven orchestration or scripted attack tool chaining.
Detects endpoint behavior consistent with AI-assisted exploit development, characterized by the execution of reverse engineering and vulnerability research tools (e.g., IDA Pro, Ghidra, AFL) interleaved with frequent outbound network connections to LLM APIs, followed by the local compilation of a new executable or DLL.
Detects coordinated activity patterns across multiple distinct tenant environments within a one-hour window. The rule looks for shared infrastructure (C2 domains), malicious tool hashes, or specific agentic-CLI command line signatures (e.g., related to orchestration, reconnaissance, or exfiltration) that suggest an AI-orchestrated actor or automated attack campaign affecting multiple organizations simultaneously.
Detects unauthorized modifications to AI agent configuration files, including system prompts, tool allow-lists, and MCP server registration files. Such changes are often performed by processes outside of approved configuration management or infrastructure-as-code pipelines, potentially allowing for persistent manipulation of AI model behavior and capabilities.
Detects bulk insertions or content updates into vector databases, document stores, or knowledge bases that contain suspected instruction-override, jailbreak, or role-hijacking phrases, particularly when performed by unauthenticated or unknown identities.
Detects anomalous, chained execution patterns initiated by AI agents integrated with Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. The rule identifies a multi-stage sequence involving the invocation of browser automation tools followed by shell execution and subsequent outbound network activity, potentially indicating an AI-driven attack chaining filesystem, shell, or cloud-API access in an unauthorized manner.
Detects anomalous, chained execution patterns initiated by AI agents integrated with Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. The rule identifies a multi-stage sequence involving the invocation of browser automation tools followed by shell execution and subsequent outbound network activity, potentially indicating an AI-driven attack chaining filesystem, shell, or cloud-API access in an unauthorized manner.
Detects anomalous outbound network connections initiated by security and developer tooling (Trivy, Checkmarx, LiteLLM, Telnyx). This behavior is consistent with supply-chain attacks, such as those attributed to the UNC6780/TeamPCP threat group, where compromised tooling is leveraged to exfiltrate sensitive cloud credentials or API keys to external, non-vendor infrastructure.
Detects anomalous, rapid execution of a high volume of diverse offensive security tools (scanners, exploitation frameworks, and C2 agents) from a single parent process within a short window, which is characteristic of automated LLM-driven orchestration or scripted attack tool chaining.
Detects outbound HTTPS connections to major generative AI inference endpoints originating from non-browser, non-development tool processes at regular intervals. This activity is indicative of beaconing behavior, where malware (specifically families like LAMEHUG) leverages LLM APIs for dynamic command generation, payload obfuscation, or C2 instruction retrieval, bypassing traditional security controls.
Detects endpoint behavior consistent with AI-assisted exploit development, characterized by the execution of reverse engineering and vulnerability research tools (e.g., IDA Pro, Ghidra, AFL) interleaved with frequent outbound network connections to LLM APIs, followed by the local compilation of a new executable or DLL.
Detects coordinated activity patterns across multiple distinct tenant environments within a one-hour window. The rule looks for shared infrastructure (C2 domains), malicious tool hashes, or specific agentic-CLI command line signatures (e.g., related to orchestration, reconnaissance, or exfiltration) that suggest an AI-orchestrated actor or automated attack campaign affecting multiple organizations simultaneously.
Detects anomalous, high-volume file access by a single process, followed by local file compression or archiving, and subsequent outbound data transfer to a non-internal IP address. This pattern is characteristic of automated agents (like those used in the GTG-1002/Anthropic AI-orchestrated campaigns) performing rapid data triage and staging for exfiltration.
Detects anomalous activity from IDEs or AI coding assistant extension host processes (e.g., VS Code, Cursor, JetBrains). The rule alerts when these processes spawn children that access sensitive local credential files, perform network connections to non-standard/unexpected domains, or modify critical CI/CD build script configuration files, which is indicative of a supply chain compromise within the developer environment.
Page 55 of 347