NVIDIA AI Red Team · November 15, 2023

Best Practices for Securing LLM-Enabled Applications

Why it matters

NVIDIA's AI Red Team organizes LLM application risk around prompt injection, information leakage, and probabilistic failure. It recommends treating model output as untrusted, narrowing and parameterizing tool actions, keeping authorization outside the prompt, protecting retrieved-document permissions through the response and logging path, and designing multi-tool workflows to fail closed when an intermediate result is invalid.

My takeaway: Never place secrets or authorization claims in model-visible context. Enforce user and document permissions outside the LLM, give tools narrow schemas and separate identities, re-authorize sensitive actions, protect prompt and completion logs at the source data's access level, and stop an orchestration chain on malformed output instead of compounding the model's error into a privileged action.
Keep exploring

More curated notes connected through Agent Security and Prompt Injection.

OWASP GenAI Security Project · guide

OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications for 2026

OWASP's community guide organizes agentic-system risk into ten categories, including goal hijacking, tool misuse, identity and privilege abuse, memory poisoning, insecure inter-agent communication, cascading failures, and rogue-agent behavior. It provides a shared taxonomy and mitigation starting point rather than a certification checklist or evidence that a deployed system is secure.

Microsoft Security Blog · guide

AI vulnerability research: measure reproducible findings and completed fixes

Microsoft’s FORGE account describes the work between a model’s vulnerability claim and a useful repair: reusable builds, duplicate removal, reachability checks, project-specific verification, reproducible triggers and regression tests. Structured rejection reasons help improve later searches. The useful operational measure is the flow of findings that survive verification and reach a fix, rather than the number of candidates generated. Reported successful-case costs exclude parts of screening, failed attempts and human work, so they are not the total cost of operating this pipeline.

OpenAI News · framework

Frontier training safety cases: connect evidence to enforced pause and rollback controls

OpenAI proposes training-run safety cases combining alignment evaluations, containment and monitoring with explicit operational ownership. Concrete measures include immutable transcripts, held-out incident tests, checks for evaluation gaming, response deadlines and fail-closed monitoring. Independent internal challenge, leadership vetoes and tracking downstream uses support stopping a run and reversing affected work. The article describes recommendations still being implemented, rather than audited proof that every safeguard already operates or that residual risk has been eliminated.