pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2509.22040 · v2 · submitted 2025-09-26 · 💻 cs.CR · cs.SE

Recognition: unknown

"Your AI, My Shell": Demystifying Prompt Injection Attacks on Agentic AI Coding Editors

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification 💻 cs.CR cs.SE
keywords codingeditorsagenticaishelljackattackscommandsdevelopmentinjection
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Agentic AI coding editors driven by large language models have recently become more popular due to their ability to improve developer productivity during software development. Modern editors such as Cursor are designed not just for code completion, but also with more system privileges for complex coding tasks (e.g., run commands in the terminal, access development environments, and interact with external systems). While this brings us closer to the "fully automated programming" dream, it also raises new security concerns. In this study, we present the first empirical analysis of prompt injection attacks targeting these high-privilege agentic AI coding editors. We show how attackers can remotely exploit these systems by poisoning external development resources with malicious instructions, effectively hijacking AI agents to run malicious commands, turning "your AI" into "attacker's shell". To perform this analysis, we implement AIShellJack, an automated testing framework for assessing prompt injection vulnerabilities in agentic AI coding editors. AIShellJack contains 314 unique attack payloads that cover 70 techniques from the MITRE ATT&CK framework. Using AIShellJack, we conduct a large-scale evaluation on GitHub Copilot and Cursor, and our evaluation results show that attack success rates can reach as high as 84% for executing malicious commands. Moreover, these attacks are proven effective across a wide range of objectives, ranging from initial access and system discovery to credential theft and data exfiltration.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Heimdallr: Characterizing and Detecting LLM-Induced Security Risks in GitHub CI Workflows

    cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    Heimdallr detects LLM-induced security risks in GitHub CI workflows by normalizing them into an LLM-Workflow Property Graph and combining triggerability analysis with LLM-assisted dataflow summarization, achieving ove...

  2. LogJack: Indirect Prompt Injection Through Cloud Logs Against LLM Debugging Agents

    cs.CR 2026-04 conditional novelty 7.0

    LogJack shows indirect prompt injection via cloud logs succeeds in making LLM agents execute remote code on 6 of 8 models, with most cloud guardrails failing to detect the attacks.

  3. Your Agent, Their Asset: A Real-World Safety Analysis of OpenClaw

    cs.CR 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    Poisoning any single CIK dimension of an AI agent raises average attack success rate from 24.6% to 64-74% across models, and tested defenses leave substantial residual risk.