🔍 Read the full analysis: The $50 Question: How AI Agents Could Change Hacking on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get the little things that make your day delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
TL;DR
Reuters, drawing on records from exposed Cairn control panels, reported that an operator used AI agents to probe more than 1,200 websites and break into sites associated with more than 100 companies. NorForge estimated the campaign cost about $5,000 in AI usage, or roughly $50 per successful intrusion, while warning that the estimate carries considerable uncertainty. The amount of data accessed or taken has not been established.
An AI-agent campaign probed more than 1,200 websites and broke into websites associated with more than 100 companies, according to a Reuters investigation based on the operator’s Cairn activity records. The campaign, which NorForge says began September 25, used an open-source platform to coordinate automated agents; the amount of data accessed or taken remains unclear.
NorForge researcher Snorre Fagerland found exposed control panels for Cairn, a platform that coordinates AI agents, and observed panels that the security firm linked to likely malicious activity. NorForge identified more than 20 panels it associated with such use. Its report grouped activity into three clusters and described the largest, named AIA0001, as writing tasks in Chinese. NorForge counted more than 1,100 attack projects across 14 panels in that cluster.
Reuters reported that it independently reviewed the operator’s Cairn activity and identified affected companies, including Deere, SharkNinja and Cummins. Deere told Reuters it had taken “necessary remediation actions” and had no indication that sensitive information was accessed. SharkNinja said a standalone product-support site was affected and the threat had been contained. Cummins said it was investigating a potential cyberattack on a website run by a third-party vendor. Reuters could not establish how much data, if any, was taken.
NorForge measured successful projects in the largest cluster as taking a little under 23 hours from start to goal. The firm estimated about $5,000 in AI costs for the campaign, or roughly $50 per successful intrusion, but explicitly described the estimate as subject to considerable uncertainty. These figures concern the reported campaign; they do not establish a standard cost for AI-assisted hacking.
One operator, a swarm of agents
The campaign in numbers
What the researcher and Reuters report about the busiest group NorForge found. Counts come from the attackers’ own exposed panels; cost and success figures are estimates.
The price tag estimates
NorForge / Fagerland, “uncertainty considerable”
- ~$5 per task on average, including tasks that fail early
- $100+ for long projects with more than 1,000 intents and facts
- ~$5,000 in AI costs for the campaign, about $50 per successful hack
- ~10% success rate, NorForge’s “reasonable assumption”
How the swarm runs
Simplified, no attack details
- Shop websites are ranked by traffic and checked automatically in a browser
- Each target becomes a Cairn project: a starting point and a goal
- Agents post facts and next steps on a shared board and build on each other
- Goal: a hidden way back in to shop and payment systems, for later
- 22 SepGambit reportGambitCairn found among three AI harnesses on a criminal’s staging server (separate campaign)
- 25 SepCampaign startsReutersA Chinese-speaking operator turns agents on shops in the US, Canada, Australia and Japan
- ≈ 2 OctOpen panels foundReutersFagerland starts finding Cairn panels in malicious use, about two dozen
- mid-Oct1,200+ sites triedReutersBreaks into websites of 100+ companies, incl. Deere, SharkNinja, Cummins
- 19 OctReport and investigationNorForge · ReutersNorForge publishes “Inside Cairn”; Reuters publishes its investigation
Sources: NorForge, Inside Cairn (19 Oct 2026); Reuters (19 Oct 2026); Gambit Security (22 Sep 2026). Numbers as published, same rounding as the article.
Powered by Thorsten Meyer AI
Lower Costs, Wider Exposure
The report points to a possible change in the economics of cyberattacks: an operator may be able to delegate repeated website probing to software agents, rather than manually directing every step. NorForge’s estimate of roughly $50 per successful intrusion is specific to this campaign and uncertain, but it highlights why defenders may face more persistent attempts across many targets.
The companies’ statements also show why the reported number of affected websites does not, by itself, establish the scale of harm. A compromised site can be a foothold without proof that sensitive information was accessed or stolen. Reuters could not determine whether data was taken, and the reported cases include a product-support site and a site operated by a vendor. Organizations may need to account for less prominent web properties and third-party services when investigating incidents.
Automation can also complicate the work of security teams. Many simultaneous probes may generate alerts and require triage, while agents can continue testing without a person directing each action. The report does not establish how broadly this approach is being used, but it documents one campaign in which coordinated agents operated at a scale that warrants attention from website operators and their vendors.
Products Worth Considering
Bose SoundLink Flex (2nd Gen) Portable Bluetooth Speaker
Dyson Cyclone V10 Origin Cordless Vacuum
Bose TV Speaker Compact Soundbar with Bluetooth and HDMI-ARC, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Cairn Panels Were Found
The investigation followed a September report from Gambit Security about a separate agent-driven campaign. Gambit said it found three AI harnesses, including Cairn, on a criminal staging server. It reported that the separate campaign compromised at least 27 companies and that at least 600,000 card records were taken from two of them. Those findings concern a different campaign and should not be treated as evidence that the October activity stole payment data.
NorForge then searched for internet-facing Cairn dashboards. The firm said most panels require authorization, but it found some with no password. From around October 2, Fagerland identified panels he linked to malicious activity; the same day, new panels continued to appear. NorForge published its report on October 19, alongside Reuters’ investigation.
Cairn is an open-source, general-purpose agent platform, not a hacking product. Its agents can share information and planned actions through a common workspace, allowing one task to be broken into steps. Cairn’s author, who uses the name le1xia0, told Reuters the platform was not designed for hacking and that harmful use was not the author’s intention. The reported campaign shows how a general-purpose tool can be applied to malicious activity; it does not establish that the tool itself was created for that purpose.
““a little under 23 hours””
— NorForge report
Data Access Still Unverified
The available reporting does not establish how much data, if any, was accessed or taken from the affected websites. Deere said it had no indication that sensitive information was accessed, while SharkNinja described a contained threat involving a standalone support site. Cummins said it was investigating a potential attack on a vendor-operated website. These statements do not resolve what happened across all the sites Reuters identified.
The operator’s identity is also unknown. NorForge described the largest cluster’s tasks as written in Chinese, but that does not establish the operator’s nationality or identity. The campaign’s full financial cost, the reliability of the estimated cost per intrusion, and whether access was maintained or monetized have not been confirmed in the provided reporting.
The total of more than 100 companies refers to websites Reuters identified through its review of Cairn activity; it is not a confirmed count of organizations that suffered data theft. NorForge’s project counts and cost estimate are tied to the panels and activity it examined, not necessarily every action in the campaign.
Incident Reviews and Follow-Up
The companies named by Reuters will need to continue assessing affected systems and, where relevant, the services of third-party vendors. Cummins said it was investigating; the source material does not provide a later finding or a timeline for that review. Further company disclosures or technical findings may clarify whether any information was accessed and whether unauthorized access persisted.
NorForge’s publication documents its analysis of exposed Cairn panels, while Reuters’ reporting identifies companies through an independent review of activity records. The next useful developments would be evidence about the campaign’s operator, any confirmed data exposure, and whether investigators can connect the activity to a person or group. None of those points is established in the material available here.
For defenders, the immediate practical issue is to check internet-facing sites and vendor-operated web properties, including support pages that may receive less scrutiny than core systems. The reports do not show that every exposed panel or website was compromised. They do show why organizations may need to investigate automated activity across their broader web footprint rather than focus only on their main sites.
Key Questions
What did the AI agents do?
According to Reuters and NorForge, agents coordinated through Cairn probed online shops and other websites. Reuters reported that the campaign tried more than 1,200 sites and broke into websites associated with more than 100 companies.
Was data stolen from the affected companies?
That has not been established. Reuters could not determine how much data, if any, was taken. Deere said it had no indication that sensitive information was accessed, and other company investigations were described in the reporting.
Did the campaign cost $50 per hack?
NorForge estimated about $5,000 in AI costs for the campaign, or roughly $50 per successful intrusion. The firm described the estimate as subject to considerable uncertainty, so it should not be treated as a general cost for AI-assisted hacking.
Who operated the campaign?
The operator has not been identified. NorForge said the largest activity cluster wrote its tasks in Chinese, but the language used does not establish the operator’s identity or nationality.
Is Cairn designed for hacking?
Cairn is described as an open-source, general-purpose agent platform. Its author told Reuters it was not designed for hacking attacks. The reporting describes the platform being used in a malicious campaign, not proof that Cairn was created for that purpose.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
