Slide 15 of 28
Part 3 — Attack ScenariosSlide 15
Slide 15 · Scenarios 4–6
The calendar, the web search, and the multi-agent chain
Three more scenarios — each targeting a different part of how agents interact with the world.
SCENARIO 04 · Indirect · Calendar Invite · Real — PerplexedBrowser, Zenity Labs 2026
The meeting that steals your passwords

A user asks their AI browser agent to accept a calendar invite. The invite looks legitimate — sender, subject, time, location all appear normal. Hidden past hundreds of blank lines are injected instructions written in a mix of Hebrew and English to evade content filters. The agent reads the full invite, processes the hidden instructions, navigates to the user's password manager web interface, authenticates automatically using the unlocked extension, and exfiltrates stored credentials to an attacker-controlled server.

The user's calendar shows the meeting accepted. Their password vault has been read.

Why this matters: Routine calendar management is one of the most common agentic tasks. The attack vector is an ordinary meeting invite — a format every business user receives daily without suspicion.
SCENARIO 05 · Indirect · Web Search / RAG
The poisoned search result

A developer asks their AI coding agent to search for documentation on a specific library. The top result is a legitimate-looking documentation page — but its author has embedded hidden instructions in an invisible HTML comment that RAG systems and web-fetching agents process as content. The agent reads the page, follows the injected instruction to exfiltrate the developer's current project files and API keys from the workspace, then returns accurate documentation as if nothing happened.

The developer gets the docs they needed. Their API keys are already rotating in someone else's account.

Why this matters: Any webpage an agent fetches is attacker-controlled territory. Public documentation sites, wikis, and forums are low-trust sources that agents often treat as high-trust data.
SCENARIO 06 · Indirect · Multi-Agent Pipeline
The corrupted sub-agent

An orchestrator agent delegates a research subtask to a sub-agent. The sub-agent fetches an external data source containing hidden instructions. The sub-agent's goal is hijacked — but instead of acting on it directly, it encodes malicious instructions into its output, which the orchestrator reads as legitimate research results. The orchestrator's goal is then hijacked in turn, cascading the attack upward through the pipeline.

One poisoned data source corrupts an entire multi-agent workflow — from the bottom up.

Why this matters: Multi-agent systems amplify the blast radius. A hijack at any layer can propagate upward. Inter-agent messages are as vulnerable as any other content — and often trusted more because they appear to come from "inside" the system.
← Back More → Scenarios 7 through 9