Speakers: Andrea Brosio, Arun Nair ยท Source: DEF CON 34 talk page ยท GitHub: weaponAIzer
๐ Download this note as Markdown
Overview
Most agentic exploit pipelines stall when there’s no public PoC โ they search, find nothing, and spin. This talk demos a multi-agent system that exploits n-days from scratch in under an hour, even with zero public exploit code available. Given only a CVE ID, the pipeline autonomously fetches vulnerability details and the upstream fix commit, spins up a pinned Docker lab running the exact vulnerable version, diffs the patch to identify the exploitable code path, generates vulnerability-class-specific attack guidance, and runs iterative exploit + validation loops until RCE is confirmed. Demonstrated live against four CVSS 9.8โ10.0 vulnerabilities โ Apache OpenMeetings deserialization, n8n unauthenticated RCE, Langflow exec() injection, and Spring AI SpEL injection โ with working exploits produced in minutes.
Notes
Brief
- AI tools have collapsed the disclosure-to-active-exploitation timeline: 2018’s ~2 years down to 2026’s ~10 hours (Palo Alto research notes 82%)
- AI guardrails will refuse to build an exploit outright โ get around it by breaking the problem up into smaller steps
Pipeline Design Principles
- Specialization โ each agent is dedicated to a focused stage
- Minimal context โ pass only what that stage needs, less noise
- Parallelism โ independent stages run concurrently
- Reproducibility โ deterministic by design, same input and execution, auditable output
weaponAIzer
14 specialized agents total, with up to 10 participating in a given workflow run:
– Research โ fetches vulnerability details, identifies the vulnerable operation, builds a vulnerability chain
– Build and compliance โ spins up a Docker environment and reproduces the issue
– Git diff โ fetches the vulnerable commit, reads vulnerable and fixed code, compares versions
– Red/Blue โ distills the raw research report and git diff into prompts for the Red Team and Blue Team agents
– LLM as judge โ reads the evidence and decides, independently of the agent that ran the exploit, whether it actually succeeded
Two exploit-validation workflows are available: a legacy path (parallel exploit/defense agents with retry logic) and a LangGraph typed subgraph (Red Team planning โ Blue Team review gate โ policy approval โ deterministic execution โ Judge validation) that adds chain-level validation to confirm the exploit actually exercises the CVE’s vulnerable code path, not just any RCE.
Stack: Claude Agent SDK for the agent runtime, LangGraph + SQLite checkpoints for orchestration (auto-resumes from checkpoint on re-run), Docker/Docker Compose for the lab, Python 3.12+. Requires only an existing CVE and LangGraph. Can be extended to Windows patch and CI/CD pipeline security gating.
Proof of Concept: CVE-2026-22738
github.com/n0n4m3x41/CVE-2026-22738-POC โ tooling was tested using Claude, but any model can be substituted in.
Filed Under: #defcon34