This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 5, 2025. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 5, 2025. It is now read-only.
Suspicious Command Detection #34
Description
Suspicious Command Detection
Summary
Introduce a mechanism to detect and flag potentially suspicious commands generated by AI assistants / agents. This feature will prompt the user to double-check such commands before they are executed or accepted, particularly for fully agentic workflows (where commands might be auto-run).
Background & Motivation
- Certain shell commands, while not even outright malicious, can pose security risks or unintended consequences if run blindly (e.g., curl | bash, nc -l, sudo).
- CodeGate should help developers identify and confirm these commands before they’re executed, reducing the risk of accidentally introducing vulnerabilities or making catastrophic changes.
- This is especially relevant in “agentic” scenarios, where an AI assistant or workflow might automatically execute commands without explicit user approval.
NOTE: As always, start small, simple and validate, the following acts as a guideline of where this could lead.
Requirements
- Suspicious Command Detection
- Maintain a list of known suspicious patterns (e.g., curl | bash, nc -l, sudo).
- Provide a mechanism (e.g., regex checks, pattern scanning) to identify these commands in AI-generated outputs.
- Examples of suspicious commands/patterns:
curl | bash
nc -l
sudo
- Changing environment variables (
PATH
,LD_LIBRARY_PATH
, etc.) - File ownership/permission changes (
chown
,chmod
) - Package installs like
npm install
, unless a positive vetting mechanism is in place - Destructive Patterns (
rm -rf *
, fork-bomb:(){ :|:& };:
- User Prompt or Flagging
- For chat-based interactions, automatically flag suspicious commands in the conversation with a warning or prompt:
“Are you sure you want to run this command? It may have system-wide effects.” - For fully agentic workflows, prevent automatic execution of flagged commands until the user explicitly confirms.
- For chat-based interactions, automatically flag suspicious commands in the conversation with a warning or prompt:
- Configuration & Customization
- Allow users to customize or extend the suspicious commands list (add, remove, or override default patterns).
- Provide a toggle to enable/disable suspicious command blocking entirely (for advanced users).
- Logging & Auditing
- Log all instances where suspicious commands are detected, along with whether the user approved or declined execution.
- Store logs locally for auditing and compliance purposes.
- Seamless Integration
- Integrate with existing interception Pipeline logic so flagged commands can be audited in the DB and dashboard.
- Ensure minimal latency or disruption to the typical developer workflow.
Implementation Ideas
- Regex-Based Detection
- A local rule set of suspicious patterns (e.g., YAML or JSON config) keyed to relevant commands.
- Simple “contains string” or regex scans on the generated command text.
- User Confirmation Dialog
- For chat usage, display a warning or highlight the suspicious command snippet. perhaps like we do for secrets, but we will need to block instead as its the reverse path
- For agentic flows, pause execution and present a modal or CLI prompt:
“Command flagged: curl | bash. Confirm to proceed or skip.”
- Integration with Policy Enforcement
- If the user’s policies forbid certain commands, auto-block or require multiple steps of confirmation (e.g., privileged operations).
- Future Enhancements
- Expand detection to suspicious script constructs (e.g., “rm -rf /”), or advanced heuristics that leverage AI to detect anomalies.
- Add a “whitelist mode” to automatically approve certain commands in controlled environments.
Acceptance Criteria
- Suspicious Patterns Defined
- A default set of suspicious commands is included.
- Users can add their own via a config or UI.
- Flagging & Approval Flow
- Chat-based usage: Suspicious commands are highlighted with a caution or warning.
- Agentic usage: Execution is blocked until the user explicitly confirms.
- Logging
- All flagged commands are recorded in a local log with timestamps and user actions (approve/deny).
- Performance
- The detection/flagging process does not introduce significant lag to normal AI interactions.
- Documentation
- Clear instructions on how to manage suspicious command lists, enable/disable the feature, and interpret the logs.
Additional Notes
- Security Considerations: This feature aims to reduce the chance of accidentally running high-risk commands, but it does not replace general best practices (e.g., running commands in a sandbox or dev environment first) and may not always capture all commands.