Scope. An incident qualifies one of two ways: public reporting says AI performed or materially accelerated the attack, or the AI system was what the attacker went through, by prompt injection, a jailbreak or its supply chain. Either way there has to be a real victim. Out: surveys, forecasts, vendor marketing, proofs of concept, bug bounty findings and disclosed flaws nobody is known to have exploited, agent mishaps with no adversary, and scams that merely invoke AI as a lure.
Caveats. Attribution and impact are as the cited researchers stated them, and several victims have not confirmed either. Pins mark a country or a headquarters city, never a server. Source organisations are described by what they are rather than named; the link goes to the report itself.
Kept current. Public threat feeds, incident registries and a world news index are checked twice a day. Every match then goes through a second stage that fetches the report itself and refuses what it cannot establish: proof of concept work, disclosures with no known exploitation, vendor announcements, round-ups, and anything already recorded here. A match that survives is written up against the scope rule above. A quiet week means nothing cleared that bar, not that nobody looked.
Records last changed. 11 November 2026. The checks above have run since; nothing found has met the bar.