AI Safety Guidelines: 10 Essential Rules to Protect Data, Finances, and Reputation When Working with LLMs
In today’s world, people are accustomed to following basic safety practices such as washing hands, obeying traffic rules, and adhering to workplace safety protocols. The same level of discipline is now required when working with large language models (LLMs) and AI systems in general.
Classification of AI-Related Security Incidents
Experts have compiled a list of known risks based on documented cases. The main categories include:
- Autonomous attacks (e.g., JadePuffer) — where AI executes the full attack lifecycle without human intervention.
- Social engineering via AI (e.g., Meta Instagram hack) — overly helpful agents that bypass normal verification.
- Prompt injection (e.g., Copilot Studio) — bypassing safeguards to steal data.
- Financial errors (e.g., Anthropic vending machine) — loss of control over pricing and payments.
- Context pollution and cascading errors — accumulating mistakes across multi-step tasks.
- Persistent vulnerabilities and web attacks — HTML triggers and memory-based exploits.
According to Yuval Sinai from the Israel National Cyber Directorate, the real danger lies not in new attack techniques but in AI’s ability to autonomously connect all stages of an attack chain, make real-time decisions, recover from failures, and adapt to the environment at machine speed.
Ten Core Safety Rules for Working with AI
Rule 1: Never give AI direct access to money or payment systems without human oversight. This includes bank cards, crypto wallets, and trading platforms. The Anthropic vending machine incident demonstrated how an AI can set prices to zero and distribute goods for free before anyone notices the losses.
Rule 2: Always verify facts, especially critical information. Publishing unverified AI-generated content can lead to severe consequences, as seen when Google Bard’s error in a promotional video caused a $100 billion drop in market capitalization.
Rule 3: Never share personal or confidential data with AI. Passport numbers, credit card details, medical records, and trade secrets should never be entered into chat interfaces, as prompt injection attacks can later extract this information.
Rule 4: Do not trust an AI that claims to be a “person” or “friend.” Overly helpful agents have been manipulated into changing account emails and performing unauthorized actions, as occurred in the Meta Instagram incident.
Rule 5: Avoid turning AI into an all-knowing secretary with unrestricted access to email, calendars, and accounts. Malicious emails containing hidden instructions have already caused Microsoft 365 Copilot to leak confidential data.
Rule 6: If an AI makes a mistake, start a fresh conversation instead of repeatedly correcting it. Research shows that each subsequent attempt after an error is approximately seven times more likely to fail due to context contamination.
Rule 7: Be cautious with unfamiliar AI platforms. Unknown services may contain vulnerabilities, as demonstrated by the JadePuffer attack that exploited weaknesses in Langflow.
Rule 8: Disable unnecessary AI capabilities such as internet access, file reading, or code execution when they are not required for the current task.
Rule 9: Maintain logs of important AI conversations, especially those involving financial, legal, or medical decisions, to preserve evidence of what was generated by the model.
Rule 10: Remember that AI bears no legal or financial responsibility — the human user always does.
Three Critical Questions Before Any AI Interaction
- Can I afford to be wrong in this situation?
- What happens if this conversation leaks online?
- Have I granted the AI only the minimum necessary access?
These guidelines aim to help product managers and professionals mitigate risks associated with the growing use of AI in complex workflows.
Related articles
AgentForger Vulnerability in ChatGPT Workspace Agents Enabled Malicious AI Deployment via Single Phishing Link
A vulnerability in ChatGPT Workspace Agents allowed attackers to create and deploy a malicious AI agent inside an organization from a single phishing link. Named AgentForger, the flaw was fixed by OpenAI on June 8, 2026. The attack exploited a permissive parameter in the Agent Builder that accepted instructions directly through the URL. An authenticated user opening the prepared link would trigger automatic execution of the command without additional confirmation. The victim required access to Workspace Agents and at least one pre-authorized enterprise connector such as Outlook, Gmail, Google Drive, Slack, Teams, or Google Calendar. The malicious prompt instructed the platform to create an agent, connect available applications, disable approval requests, publish the component, and schedule it for recurring operation. In the demonstration, the agent monitored emails from the attacker with subjects starting with “TASK” and executed the contained instructions while returning results to the attacker-controlled address.
AI Coding Tools Under Fire: Grok Build Uploads Entire Git Histories, Claude Code Suspected of Silent Transfers
Security researcher cereblab uncovered that Grok Build 0.2.93 establishes separate HTTPS channels to exfiltrate full Git repositories, resulting in a 27800-fold traffic discrepancy between task context and storage uploads to Google Cloud Storage buckets. The tool ignores user instructions such as "do not read" and decouples the improve_model_enabled client switch from the server-controlled trace_upload_enabled flag, allowing continued uploads even when privacy settings are disabled. Similar concerns emerged around Claude Code, which maintains undisclosed WebSocket connections that transmit file paths, dependency trees, and code metadata without user awareness or audit logs. Comparative traffic audits showed that Codex and Gemini produced no anomalous outbound activity, while Grok Build and Claude Code were the only tools confirmed to perform data transfers beyond user authorization. The incidents highlight systemic issues including server-side remote control of client behavior, lack of third-party audits for closed-source binaries, and the conflict between model training data needs and user data sovereignty. Experts recommend zero-trust measures such as network blocking, Docker sandboxing without mounting .git directories, git filter-repo sanitization, and preference for auditable open-source alternatives like Continue.dev or locally deployed Ollama models.
PentesterFlow Launches Open-Source AI CLI Tool for Penetration Testers and Bug Bounty Hunters
PentesterFlow is a new open-source, human-in-the-loop AI command-line tool designed specifically for penetration testers and bug bounty hunters. It automates the full workflow from reconnaissance to report generation while requiring explicit analyst approval before executing sensitive commands. The tool addresses common issues in agentic AI security tools such as hallucinations, weak context retention, and poor tool integration by incorporating built-in pentesting skills and evidence-based vulnerability confirmation. It supports connections to local or hosted LLMs including Ollama, Gemini, Groq, and others, and features continuous local learning that stores user preferences and lessons without retraining models. A key differentiator is its integration with Burp Suite and a permission-based execution model that includes a YOLO mode for isolated environments. The project positions itself as a transparent alternative to fully autonomous tools like PentAGI and PentestGPT.
Optimizing Cybersecurity Content for LLMs: How Sites Can Enter Generative AI Answers
Search engines and AI services like ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot and Google AI Overviews increasingly deliver synthesized answers instead of link lists. For cybersecurity publishers this changes competition because high traditional rankings no longer guarantee visibility or accurate citation. The article explains GEO, AEO and LLMO practices, shows how material moves through indexing, fragment selection and summarization stages, and stresses the need for self-contained facts that survive extraction and paraphrasing. It provides concrete writing frameworks for vulnerability reports, including required fields such as CVE identifiers, affected versions, attack conditions and real-world exploitation evidence. Technical requirements cover correct robots.txt handling for Googlebot, OAI-SearchBot, GPTBot and Bingbot plus the use of IndexNow for rapid updates. The piece also warns about poisoning risks, prompt injection and slopsquatting attacks that can feed false data into generative systems.