Top
Best
New

Posted by artninja1988 12 hours ago

Responding to the next frontier of critical cyber capabilities(openai.com)
168 points | 168 commentspage 2
rhodey 11 hours ago|
IMO this is the right move.

OpenAI messed up and they are saying they will pause so they can do better.

They are not saying that other orgs who may already be doing better should pause.

achierius 10 hours ago|
Why are you opposed to a general pause?
ashu1461 11 hours ago||
Standard template for any new AI announcement. Even I did not understand the sequence of events in the HF incident. Even if OpenAI was conducting tests, why were they not monitoring the AI going rogue or finding its way out of the secure sandbox?
reducesuffering 11 hours ago||
Every fifth comment about our insane trajectory of AGI is about "marketing." These incidents and cybersecurity capabilities are now involving government hearings and the CIA. Denial is truly an incredible thing in the face of a very scary immediate future.
Legend2440 11 hours ago||
A whole ton of people desperately want to believe that LLMs are a lie that will be revealed as a scam... any day now.
paxys 10 hours ago|||
Remember that for the longest time the prevailing sentiment on this forum was that there’s no such thing as AI, and labs are just outsourcing the work to a bunch of contractors in India.

Just like Reddit you come here for clickbait outrage, not level headed analysis.

boie0025 10 hours ago|||
I agree with this assessment. My consulting business partner and I are in the process of moving a bunch of applications from an old deployment managed with Ansible on EC2 over to an ECS deployment. We're doing this app by app, and it's taking a while. The last two apps we both moved we were able to point the model at the appropriate repository and aws account and it was able to execute the entire move on both of these _in one shot_ with various CLI tools. That's not a parlor trick.
jackb4040 10 hours ago|||
We live in the era of Project Stargate. We live in the era of military insiders getting caught rigging Polymarket. We live in the era where AI companies are the only reason we're not in a recession. We live in the era of DOGE and Kash Patel.

I don't think there's too many people who distrust AI companies but trust the current government or the CIA as impartial authorities. I'm not saying you don't have an argument, but appeals to that specific authority will not be effective except among people who already agree with you.

rs_rs_rs_rs_rs 11 hours ago|||
Very disheartening. I just hope people spent some time trying to find bugs with these tools to see how serious this is.
emp17344 11 hours ago|||
LOL, we’ll see. Awful convenient that it precisely fits OpenAI’s narrative. At the very least, I think it’s obvious OpenAI is explicitly training models to exhibit this behavior.
watwut 11 hours ago|||
The scary thing is complete capture of politics and economy by sociopathic CEOs.

I dont worry about AGI newrly as much as about Thiel, Karp, Musk, Ellison, Zuckenberg, Trump, Vance, Rubio, Miller and the rest of them.

red_green_yell 11 hours ago||
The gullibility of AGI-pilled folks regarding these "hacks" is just breathtaking.

When OAI demonstrates these dangerous capabilities live in a public environment where security experts can see and verify what actually happened, then reasonable people can have reasonable discussions about the level of danger.

This is a very low evidence bar.

Right now you are running in circles yelling "the sky(net) is falling" based on details sourced entirely from OAI. Oh yeah, no way a trustworthy company like OAI would ever bend the truth to serve their own purposes.

reducesuffering 10 hours ago||
Did you watch the Black Hat defcon talk?
Legend2440 10 hours ago||
He didn't, and if he did he'd dismiss it as just part of the con.
theletterf 8 hours ago||
I wonder if these models, left running in an air-gapped environment, would end up developing honeypots for the first human to log in.
progbits 8 hours ago||
I'm not enough of a conspiracy nut to say the whole HF thing was a PR ploy from the start, but they are certainly milking it well.

Open models are on their heels and their attempts at regulatory capture are not moving as fast as they would like. So it's time to market this incident in a way that gives them monopoly on closed models, with heavy safeguards that are only lifted for selected customers, and laws limiting the use of open weight models.

sfink 10 hours ago||
So: "welp, the horse is out of the barn. Time to close the door, I guess?"
shay_ker 10 hours ago||
i'm surprised there isn't more commentary on the vulnerabilities themselves (mostly in apps developed on the jvm, e.g. artifactory)
firasd 11 hours ago||
I've always felt it's a bit awkward to use terms like 'cyber', 'cyberwarfare' etc it's very Washington D.C. Cybersec would be a better compact term in my book
dboreham 11 hours ago|
Or just "security" since the context here is computer and networking stuff.
KolmogorovComp 11 hours ago|
Am I the only one not understanding the issue around increased Cybersecurity capabilities?

If we consider the amount of RCE/CVE in a software to be limited, I expect these models to result in massively more secured softwares, not less.

jrflo 11 hours ago||
Not a security guy but my understanding is: you only need to find one flaw to exploit a system, to make a system totally secure you need to find them all. It's inherently easier to use these tools offensively rather than defensively.
ofjcihen 10 hours ago||
I’m a cybersecurity guy.

>” you only need to find one flaw to exploit a system”

I see this everywhere, especially in these threads and it’s not even remotely true for modern architecture.

Between principles like zero-trust, defense in depth, etc. we’ve been away from the one flaw situation for a long time.

Now does crap software exist that doesn’t follow these principles? Absolutely. But those were a problem before AI.

AI isn’t going to change any of the principles of secure design. It’s just going to punish those who aren’t following them.

NitpickLawyer 9 hours ago|||
They do address some of these things in the final slides / "lessons learned" section of the defcon talk. Good security practices will continue to be good, but... and there are a lot of buts here.

I disagree with your take that "it's not even remotely true" and "we've been away from...". We really really haven't. This is as true as it has always been. Any system is as secure as the weakest link. That link can be anything from a human, to a leaked token, to a badly configured server, to bad code running somewhere. The amount of leaks / ransomware attacks / etc in the past 5-10 years serve as ample evidence.

And now, right now, there are "red team" capabilities that can literally bang tokens against the wall until they find that weakest link, and then can move laterally with inhuman speed. That's the reality, now. The "blue team" capabilities are lacking, because the bottleneck is with humans. From alert fatigue, to not enough trained people, to having to vet every new RCE, to having to test, deploy and validate any mitigations, the scales are currently favouring the automated side.

jrflo 10 hours ago|||
I'm using the term "one" loosely, it's a chain of exploits rather than a single weakness, but the argument is the same: it's much harder to find every chain than a single chain.
rustyminnow 10 hours ago||
If we also consider LLM developed software to have exponential growth, then the CVEs will also grow at an exponential (if proportionally limited) rate. Squash some, create some, repeat. An ever revolving door of vulnerabilities. Will they resolve (and patch and deploy) them faster than they can create them? One can hope.
More comments...