Auto-GPT is an experimental open-source application showcasing the capabilities of the GPT-4 language model. The Auto-GPT command line UI makes heavy use of color-coded print statements to signify different types of system messages to the user, including messages that are crucial for the user to review and control which commands should be executed. Before v0.4.3, it was possible for a malicious external resource (such as a website browsed by Auto-GPT) to cause misleading messages to be printed to the console by getting the LLM to regurgitate JSON encoded ANSI escape sequences (u001b[). These escape sequences were JSON decoded and printed to the console as part of the models thinking process. The issue has been patched in release version 0.4.3.
Weakness
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes output that is written to logs.
Affected Software
| Name |
Vendor |
Start Version |
End Version |
| Auto-gpt |
Agpt |
* |
0.4.3 (excluding) |
Extended Description
This can allow an attacker to forge log entries or inject malicious content into logs.
Log forging vulnerabilities occur when:
Potential Mitigations
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
References