Penetration Testing for AI Systems: How to Secure Modern LLMs, Agents, and AI Infrastructure
As AI transforms business operations, the attack surface expands while security often lags behind. What should you know before launching AI products?
Why does Penetration Testing of AI systems matter in today’s high-risk landscape?
AI implementations are accelerating faster than security safeguards. According to the World Economic Forum (Global Cybersecurity Outlook 2025), only 37% of businesses report having processes in place to assess the security impact of AI adoption.
This reveals a critical gap. As organizations deploy third-party, open-source, or self-hosted LLMs, they introduce new components such as model endpoints, vector databases, agentic systems, and external integrations that conventional security testing doesn’t adequately cover. These areas expand the attack surface and require specialized assessment.
AI penetration testing is designed to reveal these emerging weaknesses through specialized techniques tailored to intelligent systems. This article examines the critical attack vectors affecting today’s AI implementations, and how security teams can identify vulnerabilities before adversaries do.
Prompt Injection Attacks and LLM Jailbreak Techniques
LLMs can be manipulated through carefully crafted prompts that override their instructions or bypass safety constraints. Jailbreak attacks exploit a fundamental limitation of current models: they cannot reliably distinguish between system-level directives and adversarial user input.
These attacks range from simple prompt injections - that override instructions within normal inputs - to more advanced techniques that exploit how the model interprets roles, formatting, and context to reveal system prompts or restricted behavior. Their danger lies in unpredictability: a model may reject a direct request, yet comply when the same intent is phrased indirectly or injected through contextual cues.
Penetration testing evaluates these weaknesses systematically by applying direct, indirect, and latent prompt injection techniques to determine whether guardrails fail under realistic adversarial pressure.
AI Agent Security Risks and Real Abuse Scenarios
AI agents introduce unique risks because they are designed to take action. Unlike chat-oriented LLMs, agents can invoke tools, execute code, query databases, or interact with external systems (depending on their configured capabilities). This makes them powerful, but also dangerous when misused.
The primary issue is over-privileged access. To maximize utility, organizations often grant agents broad permissions, creating opportunities for abuse. An attacker might manipulate the agent through crafted instructions or indirect prompt injection, causing it to retrieve sensitive data, escalate privileges, or perform system-level actions it was never intended to authorize.
Penetration testing in AI environments targets these scenarios directly, evaluating whether agents can be coerced into misusing their permissions, accessing unauthorized resources, or violating policy-driven boundaries.
Security Vulnerabilities in AI System Integrations
AI models rarely operate in isolation. They interact with APIs, databases, and external services, turning every integration point into a potential attack vector where malicious inputs can propagate across systems.
The risk increases with function calling, where the model can trigger actions in downstream services based solely on user-generated prompts. Through prompt injection, an attacker may coerce the model into making unauthorized API calls, querying restricted databases, or performing actions the user should never be able to initiate.
Penetration testing maps and exercises these interconnected attack paths, validating whether adversarial prompts can flow through the system and cause unintended effects. This assessment exposes how AI-specific vulnerabilities amplify traditional integration risks.
AI Infrastructure Security: Weak Points Across the Model Stack
AI systems introduce broad attack surfaces that extend far beyond the model itself. Whether deployed in cloud or on-prem environments, they rely on multiple components such as model servers, vector databases, training pipelines, and inference endpoints, each with its own security implications.
These components create AI-specific vulnerabilities. An exposed API without authentication can give attackers direct access, while misconfigured storage may leak model weights or training data. Even vector databases, often considered low-risk, store embeddings that could enable membership-inference or partial-reconstruction attacks if accessed by an adversary.
Because of these risks, testing must extend beyond the model. Pentesting evaluates both external and internal surfaces, uncovering misconfigurations, exposed endpoints, and access-control weaknesses across the full AI stack.
Application Logic Flaws in AI Systems
AI systems still rely on traditional security layers such as authentication, authorization, and session management. When these controls fail, the consequences are amplified: broken authentication can expose AI capabilities to unauthorized users, while weak authorization may allow access to restricted model variants or administrative functions.
Beyond these fundamentals, the application layer governs AI-specific behavior including prompt routing, input validation, and output filtering. Flaws in this logic can bypass model-level protections entirely. As a result, an attacker may manipulate prompt templates, evade content filters, or switch to alternative model versions.
Penetration testing evaluates these application flows end-to-end, validating authentication, authorization, and input-handling mechanisms to determine whether they adequately protect AI functionality.
Techniques for Bypassing AI Safety and Moderation Controls
AI systems rely on safety mechanisms such as content filters, output classifiers, and moderation layers. Attackers, however, can develop techniques to circumvent these safeguards, making it essential to test whether they hold up under adversarial pressure.
Common evasion methods include jailbreak chaining, where multiple benign-looking prompts combine to bypass restrictions, and semantic perturbations that preserve malicious intent while avoiding detection. Indirect attacks are equally dangerous, routing harmful content through trusted components to evade monitoring.
Ethical hackers work alongside defense teams to identify gaps in these safeguards. In this context, pentesting evaluates whether content filters can be bypassed, whether output classifiers correctly identify harmful outputs, and whether monitoring systems detect sophisticated evasion attempts.
Need Expert Penetration Testing for AI Applications?
Building secure AI systems requires more than traditional application testing. Modern LLMs, autonomous agents, RAG pipelines, and AI-driven integrations introduce attack surfaces that demand specialized, hands-on expertise.
That’s why we work with offensive security specialists who understand how these systems behave in the real world. Their approach blends deep technical knowledge of AI applications with an attacker’s mindset, helping teams uncover weaknesses before they turn into incidents.
Our pentesting partners focus on:
Targeted attack scenarios: End-to-end simulations that reflect real attacker behavior across LLMs, agents, vector databases, model endpoints, and downstream integrations.
Regulatory compliance: Assessments designed to support emerging AI regulations and established frameworks such as SOC 2, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, as well as internal AI-risk programs.
Real-world risk prioritization: Manual testing that uncovers high-impact vulnerabilities in prompt handling, tool-calling, model routing, and AI infrastructure, issues that automated testing alone cannot detect.
Last updated