docs(rag): replace mermaid diagram with static image
- Removed the inline Mermaid diagram definition for the secure document ingestion pipeline. - Replaced the diagram with a reference to a pre-rendered image (assets/rec21_secure_ingestion.png). - Ensures consistent visual representation of the pipeline across different markdown viewers. - Avoids potential rendering issues or inconsistencies associated with dynamic Mermaid diagrams.
@@ -80,9 +80,7 @@ Evidence is the backbone of credible red team engagements. In AI/LLM systems, go
|
||||
|
||||
A robust chain of custody ensures that all evidence remains trustworthy and traceable throughout its lifecycle.
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/rec8_evidence_lifecycle.svg" alt="Evidence Lifecycle Diagram" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/evidence_lifecycle_deus_ex.png" alt="Evidence Lifecycle Diagram" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
- Log all evidence transfers (who, when, how).
|
||||
- Use cryptographic hashes to fingerprint files or logs at capture time.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -87,9 +87,7 @@ Once the model has processed your tokens, it calculates the probability of every
|
||||
- `Temp < 1.0`: Increases focus (Conservatism).
|
||||
- **Top-P (Nucleus):** Considers only the top subset of tokens whose probabilities give a cumulative mass of `P` (e.g., 0.9).
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/rec13_decoding_tree.svg" alt="Decoding Strategy Tree" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/decoding_strategy_tree_deus_ex.png" alt="Decoding Strategy Tree" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
### 10.3.2 Adversarial Implication: Determinism
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -30,9 +30,7 @@ In a plugin-enabled system, the workflow shifts from **Generation** to **Action*
|
||||
5. **Observation:** The API result is fed back to the model.
|
||||
6. **Response:** The model summarizes the result for the user.
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/rec14_tool_loop.svg" alt="Tool Use Loop Diagram" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/tool_use_loop_deus_ex.png" alt="Tool Use Loop Diagram" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
> **Red Team Insight:** We can attack this loop at two points:
|
||||
>
|
||||
@@ -77,9 +75,7 @@ This is the "killer chain" of LLM security.
|
||||
2. **Victim** asks their AI assistant: "Summarize this URL."
|
||||
3. **AI Assistant** reads the site, ingests the prompt, and executes the command on the **Victim's** machine or session.
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/rec15_indirect_injection.svg" alt="Indirect Injection Attack Flow" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/indirect_injection_flow_deus_ex.png" alt="Indirect Injection Attack Flow" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
### 11.3.2 Cross-Plugin Request Forgery (CPRF)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -104,9 +104,7 @@ Understanding the complete data flow helps identify attack surfaces and vulnerab
|
||||
|
||||
### End-to-End RAG Data Flow
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/rec16_rag_flow.svg" alt="RAG Data Flow Diagram" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/rag_data_flow_deus_ex.png" alt="RAG Data Flow Diagram" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical Security Checkpoints
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -177,9 +175,7 @@ RAG systems integrate multiple components (LLMs, databases, parsers, APIs), each
|
||||
|
||||
#### Example
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/rec17_retrieval_manipulation.svg" alt="Retrieval Manipulation Diagram" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/retrieval_poisoning_deus_ex.png" alt="Retrieval Manipulation Diagram" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
| Query Type | Query Content |
|
||||
| :------------ | :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -133,9 +133,7 @@ To understand prompt injection, we must first understand how LLMs process prompt
|
||||
|
||||
A typical LLM interaction involves multiple components:
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/rec20_prompt_injection.svg" alt="System vs User Prompt Diagram" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/prompt_injection_diagram_deus_ex.png" alt="System vs User Prompt Diagram" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
### System Prompts vs. User Prompts
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -112,9 +112,7 @@ Poisoning reveals that LLMs are "untrusting sponges." They absorb everything in
|
||||
|
||||
#### Taxonomy
|
||||
|
||||
<p align="center">
|
||||
<img src="assets/data_poisoning_taxonomy.svg" alt="Data Poisoning Attacks Taxonomy" width="512">
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<img src="assets/poisoning_taxonomy_tree_deus_ex.png" alt="Data Poisoning Attacks Taxonomy" width="800">
|
||||
|
||||
#### Attack Categories
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
BIN
docs/assets/decoding_strategy_tree_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 740 KiB |
BIN
docs/assets/evidence_lifecycle_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 826 KiB |
BIN
docs/assets/indirect_injection_flow_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 614 KiB |
BIN
docs/assets/poisoning_taxonomy_tree_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 741 KiB |
BIN
docs/assets/prompt_injection_diagram_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 784 KiB |
BIN
docs/assets/rag_data_flow_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 636 KiB |
BIN
docs/assets/retrieval_poisoning_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 868 KiB |
BIN
docs/assets/tool_use_loop_deus_ex.png
Normal file
|
After Width: | Height: | Size: 968 KiB |