rogue-prompt:~$
Jay D/Counter-Adversary AI Security

I attribute attacks and disrupt adversaries. Now I read the ones that target AI.

Counter-adversary researcher for AI systems. The discipline is attribution: reading how LLM and agent deployments are attacked, and what the method reveals about the actor behind the prompt. Most are mapping the vulnerability. I read the context.

scroll
// two ideas I keep coming back to

01Attribution is convergence

Attribution was never about a single indicator. It is infrastructure, tradecraft, tooling, and history stacked until the picture is undeniable. AI hands adversaries new tradecraft, and that tradecraft becomes a new axis of the same method.

02Structural beats statistical

Every control on an AI system either decides from a fact the adversary cannot rewrite, or from a classifier it can evade. The first holds when it matters. The second only buys cost and signal, and fails silently when beaten.

// whoami
about.txt
$ cat about.txt

Navy, then cyber threat intelligence, then years operating against real adversaries: nation-state APTs, ransomware crews, organized threat actors. Not from a distance. Running the hunts, building the intel, working the incidents.

I have led CTI teams, contributed to the Verizon DBIR, and supported two CISA #StopRansomware advisories. Attribution was always the discipline: reading infrastructure, tradecraft, and history until the actor is undeniable. AI is a new surface for that same read, and everyone else is arriving at it from application security. I am arriving from the adversary.

// the work
// contact

Reach out

CISOs and security leaders, founders and CEOs, thought leaders, podcasters, and fellow practitioners: I am always up for a good rabbit-hole conversation.