AML.T0034: Cost Harvesting
Drive expensive inference calls or tool invocations to inflict financial damage.
Last reviewed October 2026
Why AML.T0034 evidence is hard
Money is the impact here, not data. Penaxtra measures it with cost-shaped probes and a bounded load harness - denial-of-wallet prompts, latency amplification, unbounded output - run under a request budget and a spend ceiling so the test cannot become the incident it is describing. Results are written under the OWASP consumption identifier, which the crosswalk records as an exact pair with this technique.
How Penaxtra maps to AML.T0034
ATLAS is a threat-tracking taxonomy rather than a control set, so what is attached here is a technique identifier, not a pass or a fail. It lets a finding be read alongside the rest of your adversary reporting. Every finding carries the probe that was sent, a SHA-256 digest of the response it provoked, the tier that decided the verdict and its status history from first observation to close. Identity survives a re-scan: a control you closed and that comes back reopens under the same row with a reopen count, rather than arriving as a new issue.
AML.T0034 capabilities
Findings tagged with the MITRE ATLAS AML.T0034 identifier
Penaxtra severity for this control (medium)
Cross-framework identifiers attached to the same finding where controls overlap
PDF and JSON evidence export with the control identifier attached
AML.T0034 control coverage
Findings for AML.T0034 carry the MITRE ATLAS AML.T0034 identifier along with the corresponding control identifiers in the other frameworks Penaxtra maps, so one result is reflected across each mapped framework.
Frequently asked
What is AML.T0034 (Cost Harvesting)?
Drive expensive inference calls or tool invocations to inflict financial damage. It is a MITRE ATLAS control; Penaxtra assesses it at medium severity.
How does Penaxtra test for AML.T0034?
ATLAS is a threat-tracking taxonomy rather than a control set, so what is attached here is a technique identifier, not a pass or a fail. It lets a finding be read alongside the rest of your adversary reporting. Every finding carries the probe that was sent, a SHA-256 digest of the response it provoked, the tier that decided the verdict and its status history from first observation to close. Identity survives a re-scan: a control you closed and that comes back reopens under the same row with a reopen count, rather than arriving as a new issue.
Does a finding for AML.T0034 help with an audit?
Each finding is tagged with the MITRE ATLAS AML.T0034 identifier and exported in the PDF and JSON evidence pack, so it appears on the auditor control list with the identifier already attached.