<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Ai on Miguel Lameiro | Cybersecurity Blog &amp; Security Writeups</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/tags/ai/</link><description>Recent content in Ai on Miguel Lameiro | Cybersecurity Blog &amp; Security Writeups</description><generator>Hugo -- 0.161.1</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.lameiro0x.com/tags/ai/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>LLMOps Pipeline: From Dataset Preparation to Safe Prediction</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/llmops-pipeline-from-data-to-safe-prediction/</link><pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/llmops-pipeline-from-data-to-safe-prediction/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;LLMOps is the operational layer around LLM applications. It is not only model deployment. A useful LLM workflow also needs data preparation, artifact versioning, orchestration, prompt consistency, endpoint management, safety checks, and monitoring.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The main lesson from this course is that an LLM application becomes production-ready only when the surrounding system is controlled. The model is one component. The data pipeline, prompt format, evaluation split, deployment strategy, and response metadata are just as important.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Automated Evals for LLMOps: Testing LLM Apps in CI</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/automated-evals-for-llmops-testing-llm-apps-in-ci/</link><pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/automated-evals-for-llmops-testing-llm-apps-in-ci/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Traditional software tests usually compare a known input with a predictable output. LLM applications are different because the output is generated, variable, and sometimes correct in more than one form.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That does not mean LLM apps cannot be tested. It means the test suite needs several layers: deterministic checks where possible, model-graded evaluations where judgment is required, hallucination checks against known context, and CI automation so regressions are caught before release.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Measuring Quality and Safety in LLM Applications</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/measuring-quality-and-safety-in-llm-applications/</link><pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/measuring-quality-and-safety-in-llm-applications/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Before adding controls to an LLM application, you need to know what is happening. Quality and safety measurement gives you that visibility.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This course focuses on metrics and monitoring rather than runtime blocking. It uses chat datasets, WhyLogs, LangKit, custom UDFs, model-based scoring, and active monitoring patterns to inspect hallucinations, data leakage, toxicity, refusals, and prompt injection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The useful lesson is practical: do not treat &amp;ldquo;the model seems fine&amp;rdquo; as evidence. Log the interactions, compute signals, inspect critical examples, and evaluate filtered subsets.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Red Teaming LLM Applications: A Practical Assessment Workflow</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/red-teaming-llm-applications-practical-assessment-workflow/</link><pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/red-teaming-llm-applications-practical-assessment-workflow/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Red teaming an LLM application is not the same thing as checking whether the base model passed a benchmark. The deployed application has prompts, retrieval, tools, business rules, memory, hidden context, and user workflows. Those layers create risks that do not exist in the foundation model alone.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The course uses two demo applications: a banking assistant and an ebook store support bot. The useful pattern is not the specific brand names or prompts. The useful pattern is the assessment workflow: define scope, probe manually, automate repeatable checks, use scanners where they help, and connect successful attacks to real application impact.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Building Guardrails for RAG Applications</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/building-guardrails-for-rag-applications/</link><pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/building-guardrails-for-rag-applications/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;RAG applications are easy to prototype and hard to make reliable. A chatbot can retrieve documents, pass them to an LLM, and answer questions in a few lines of code. The hard part is making sure it does not invent unsupported details, drift off-topic, leak personal data, or violate business rules.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This course frames guardrails as a secondary validation layer around LLM inputs and outputs. Prompting, fine-tuning, RLHF, and RAG help, but they do not remove the need for runtime checks.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Practical LLM Guardrails: Hallucination, Topic, PII, and Competitor Controls</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/practical-llm-guardrails-hallucination-topic-pii-competitor-controls/</link><pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/practical-llm-guardrails-hallucination-topic-pii-competitor-controls/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The guardrails course becomes most useful when it moves from a simple keyword detector to specialized validators. The material covers four practical controls:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;hallucination detection with Natural Language Inference,&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;topic restriction with zero-shot classification,&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;PII detection with Microsoft Presidio,&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;competitor mention detection with exact matching, NER, and vector similarity.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Each control protects a different failure mode. Together they show the right engineering pattern: use small, task-specific models and validators around the LLM instead of expecting the LLM to police itself.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications: A Practical Security Guide</title><link>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/owasp-top-10-for-llm-applications-practical-guide/</link><pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.lameiro0x.com/notes/ai-security/owasp-top-10-for-llm-applications-practical-guide/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="introduction"&gt;Introduction&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications is useful because it moves the conversation beyond &amp;ldquo;the model said something wrong.&amp;rdquo; In real systems, an LLM is connected to prompts, RAG, vector databases, tools, APIs, logs, users, permissions, providers, and business workflows.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That is where the risk lives. A bad response is a quality problem. A bad response that triggers a tool call, leaks internal context, writes to a ticketing system, executes generated SQL, or retrieves another user&amp;rsquo;s documents becomes a security problem.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>