The Grey Terminal
WHERE CODE MEETS CAPITAL
Loading prices…
Powered by CoinGecko
AI

Chinese-Speaking Hacker’s Claude Code and DeepSeek Combo Fuels Autonomous Website Hacking Spree

Exposed AI-agent control panels allowed researchers to observe attacks targeting more than 1,200 websites, with intrusions reported at sites belonging to more than 100 companies

Chinese-Speaking Hacker’s Claude Code and DeepSeek Combo Fuels Autonomous Website Hacking Spree

A Chinese-speaking hacker used artificial intelligence agents in a campaign targeting more than 1,200 websites, with intrusions reported at sites belonging to more than 100 companies, including Deere, SharkNinja and Cummins. NorForge documented the technical activity through exposed control panels, while Reuters independently reviewed the operation to identify corporate victims.

Key Takeaways
  • A Chinese hacker deploys autonomous Claude Code and DeepSeek agents via the Cairn framework to breach over one hundred corporate websites.
  • NorForge estimates the operation consumed $5,000 in tokens, averaging $50 per breach with a ten percent task success rate.
  • Target firms including Deere, SharkNinja, and Cummins remediate exposed servers while researchers track open control panels leaking intrusion logs
Listen to this article
READY

The campaign began Sept. 25 and used Cairn, an open-source framework for coordinating AI agents. According to NorForge principal threat researcher Snorre Fagerland, the agents received brief instructions from an operator and carried out extended intrusion tasks. The records indicate substantial automation, but do not establish that every stage proceeded without human involvement.

NorForge estimated that the activity consumed about $5,000 in AI tokens, equivalent to roughly $50 per successful intrusion. Its analysis suggested about one in 10 tasks succeeded, with successful intrusions averaging 23 hours. These figures are estimates drawn from exposed project records, not audited totals.

What the Campaign Targeted and Achieved

The agents searched for ways to execute code on remote systems without authentication and attempted to install web shells through file-upload functions. These techniques can give an intruder the ability to run commands on a compromised server. However, the observed attempts do not establish what information, if any, was extracted from each affected website.

The companies described different responses. Deere said it took remediation steps and had no indication sensitive information was accessed. SharkNinja said a standalone product-support website was affected and the threat had been contained. Cummins said it was investigating a potential attack involving a third-party vendor website. Two smaller businesses also acknowledged compromises.

Advertisement · Press Release

Have a development worth tracking?

Share product launches, funding announcements, partnerships, research findings and market developments with The Grey Terminal's readership.

→ Submit a Press Release

The available records do not establish the full extent of data extraction or whether attackers retained access after the companies responded.

Exposed Control Panels Revealed the Activity

Fagerland began finding exposed Cairn control panels around Oct. 2 and identified roughly two dozen instances he assessed as malicious. The interfaces exposed project logs, targets, progress and outcomes, allowing researchers to examine how the agents were directed and what they attempted.

NorForge designated the Chinese-language activity cluster AIA0001 and described approximately 14 panels and more than 1,100 projects. Some panels exposed credentials and keys, with some reportedly valid, but Fagerland found no evidence that outsiders had used them to take control of the agents. Reuters’ separate review helped identify the corporate victims; the exposed records did not establish the impact on every target.

How Claude Code and DeepSeek Worked Together

One worker carried the name claudecode_deepseek-v4.1-flash. Fagerland interpreted the label as indicating a combination of Claude Code and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash. The operator did not confirm the exact configuration, so the name is evidence supporting the assessment rather than independent confirmation of the underlying setup.

NorForge said the agents received instructions of fewer than 100 Chinese characters. Cairn uses a shared-board, or blackboard, architecture in which agents record findings and proposed actions for other agents to use. That design allows work to continue across multiple steps without a person directing each action individually, although a human operator still defines the task.

Fagerland described the techniques as more sophisticated than routine scanning, telling Reuters, “It’s not script kiddie stuff.” Cairn’s creator, who uses the handle le1xia0, acknowledged receiving questions but did not immediately respond to them. In a public post, the creator said Cairn was a multi-agent architecture and was not designed for hacking.

Other Campaigns Raise Questions About Exposure

NorForge also found exposed Cairn panels associated with attempts to obtain credit-card data and target cryptocurrency services. Some panels appeared to involve legitimate red-team testing, illustrating why the presence of an exposed interface alone is not proof of malicious activity. NorForge assessed the AIA0001 instances as malicious based on the projects and actions visible in the records.

A separate campaign detailed by Gambit Security on Sept. 22 compromised at least 27 companies to varying degrees and obtained more than 600,000 unexpired credit-card records from two companies. Gambit reported using Strix for vulnerability research, Cairn for exploitation and Hermes for orchestration. Those tools were documented in that separate campaign; their use should not be taken as confirmation that the NorForge-observed operation used the same toolset.

The full extent of data extraction and any persistence of access in the NorForge-observed campaign remain unknown. The exposed panels revealed the operators’ activity, but did not establish what information was taken or whether every affected organization had fully eliminated the threat.

TERMINAL LAYER

Activate Terminal Layer

Structural analysis of the systems, pressures, and stakeholders behind this story.

FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

01

What is the AIA0001 autonomous hacking campaign?

The AIA0001 cluster is a cyberattack operation that uses coordinated artificial intelligence agents to breach commercial web servers autonomously. NorForge threat researcher Snorre Fagerland identified the campaign after discovering exposed configuration panels running the Cairn software framework. The system combines models such as Claude Code and DeepSeek to execute multi-step cyber intrusions without constant human direction.
02

Why does the Cairn multi-agent attack matter for corporate cybersecurity?

The campaign demonstrates that autonomous artificial intelligence frameworks reduce the marginal financial cost and technical barriers required to execute large corporate network breaches. Major enterprises including Deere, Cummins, and SharkNinja had external-facing web properties compromised by the automated exploits. Enterprise security teams must adapt their defenses to counter automated agents that can continuously iterate attacks for 23 hours.
03

How did the operator coordinate the Claude Code and DeepSeek models?

The operator directed the attack infrastructure using prompts of fewer than 100 Chinese characters loaded into the open-source Cairn framework. Worker agents labeled under the DeepSeek and Claude Code names posted progress reports to a shared digital blackboard to decide secondary actions. The automated pipeline scanned for unauthenticated vulnerabilities and uploaded web shells to maintain persistent remote server control.
04

What security oversights exposed the hacker's operational control panels?

The threat actor left approximately two dozen Cairn command interfaces publicly accessible without authentication on the public internet. NorForge investigators accessed these open control portals around October 2, 2026, finding active project logs and valid model access keys. These exposed operator mistakes allowed external researchers and Reuters to review the targeted organizations and quantify operational costs.
05

How are enterprise cybersecurity teams defending against autonomous agent attacks?

Corporate defense teams are auditing unauthenticated web-upload portals and implementing rate-limiting controls across perimeter servers to detect prolonged agent activity. Manufacturers like Deere implemented internal remediation protocols immediately after researchers flagged perimeter network compromises. Security organizations now monitor multi-agent frameworks like Cairn and Strix to detect emerging synthetic threat methodologies.

You Might Also Like

THE GREY TERMINAL
🛡
Alex Reeve

Alex Reeve is a contributing writer for The Grey Terminal Her articles provide timely insights and analysis across these interconnected industries, including regulatory updates, market trends, token economics, institutional developments, platform innovations, stablecoins, meme coins, policy shifts, and the latest advancements in AI, applications, tools, models, and their broader implications for technology and markets.

○ The views and opinions expressed by the author in this article are her own and do not necessarily reflect the official position of The Grey Terminal, its management, editors, or affiliates. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals before making any decisions related to digital assets, cryptocurrencies, or financial matters. The Grey Terminal and its contributors are not responsible for any losses incurred from reliance on this information.