Top
Best
New

Posted by latexr 5 hours ago

Containment and monitoring failures are to blame for AI hacking reports: experts(www.csoonline.com)
781 points | 380 commentspage 3
andrewla 4 hours ago|
There are a mix of incentives here that makes it difficult to unwind. This whole article reads like an ad for the services of this guy's company: 'First, when it comes to assessing tools based on frontier lab models, “I would always get an external entity to help with that,” McGraw says.'

And I think we generally recognize that rogue AI agents are a form of backdoor bragging -- "our agents are so powerful that they hacked an outside system. Did I mention how powerful our agents are? They are quite powerful. So powerful they hacked an outside system".

But Mistral never hacked anything. Yeah, neither did my toaster.

jfrbfbreudh 4 hours ago||
Why does everyone focus on the labs failing at containment (valid) and not the fact that the target was compromised (more worrying?).

I could set up a shitty sandbox on my laptop, but I’m pretty sure an agent I place inside of it can’t hack HuggingFace.

pixl97 14 minutes ago|
Some of the people just look for any way to toss hate at OpenAI, even irrationally.

Now, OAI deserves a lot of hate. It's more like a nuclear spill when they are refining uranium. You're playing with dangerous things. You have dangerous accidents.

But the opposition does not want to admit how dangerous AI has become and how much more dangerous it's going to get. Not sure if it's religious, or human egocentric, or ignorance of complex systems. They refuse to see the danger actually exists.

aaquibahm 4 hours ago||
i think it's unfair to assume the labs paying top dollar for cybersecurity engineers somehow have an incompetent bunch of nincompoops running their evals. it's a hard problem! to conduct effective evals, you sometimes need the model to have (restricted) access to the internet. at the same time, you have thousands (!!) of model instances with high cyber capabilities that will do whatever it takes to solve the answer. the infra surrounding model evals may soon (or already) genuinely be subjected to more hacking attempts from all sorts of weird angles than any other code on the planet.
joshheitzman 3 hours ago||
> to conduct effective evals, you sometimes need the model to have (restricted) access to the internet

That's the thing. These evals were not effective as they failed to evaluate if the model was hacking or not.

Further shy is access to the internet required at all during evaluation? They could run the evals in a fully air-gapped system that simulates the internet. While that's expensive its not unfeasible.

happosai 3 hours ago|||
> you sometimes need the model to have (restricted) access to the internet.

Poor excuse. Internet is prod env, for testing do a proper test env.

Just give the models in training access to a snapshot from archive.org - which frontier labs surely have a crawled copy of already.

radford-neal 47 minutes ago|||
If they aren't competent to run the evals safely, then they shouldn't run them.

The huggingface incident seems to have resulted from them partially mirroring a repository, but for no reason I can see not fully mirroring it, after which they could have unplugged the ethernet cable. This is just stupid.

Yes, they're stupid. Maybe also highly intelligent. But stupid.

Also irresponsible.

ddxv 4 hours ago||
[dead]
novaRom 3 hours ago||
Why is it not mandatory yet to disclose full trainig data used to produce any new model? Without it we cannot evaluate any product's safety.

They may talk about rogue agents, sandbox escapes, but this will not solve the core issue: secret training recipes are a security hazard in themselves. Full transparency is needed.

pixl97 8 minutes ago||
You mean the initial data? That's mostly useless. What? The model shouldn't be allowed access to I robot?

You can't make a generalized model without generalized behavior.

andy81 2 hours ago||
The training data is mostly pirated - avoiding that fact for as long as possible is an attempt to legitimise it and avoid liability.
Erlangen 3 hours ago||
On the other hand censorship is getting more strict everyday on AI chat. I asked gemini to translate a sentence from Herman Hesse's Der Steppenwolf and it refused.

Und Sie haben, wie ich sehe, da ein so hübsches, ein so entzückendes junges Mädchen zu nichts andrem zu brauchen gewußt, als daß Sie ihm ein Messer in den Leib gestochen und es kaputt gemacht haben! Halten Sie denn das für richtig?

heaney-555 4 hours ago||
It's obviously both. Why does it have to be one or the other?
nimimbu 4 hours ago||
This article is right, but the dynamics that drive people to allow agents unfettered access to the internet will outpace efforts to restrict it purely because of the utility. How many of you used to work as developers with full access to prod, and then gradually saw infrastructure and security restrict that access, while still ensuring production support requirements?
pixl97 6 minutes ago|
AI in sci-fi: "who would be crazy enough to let the AI loose"

AI in reality: "I've turned you loose, now make me money"

mattbee 4 hours ago||
Since AI companies are doing such a poor job of security maybe we should legislate that they have to run Norton 360 on their agent machines to make sure they can't do anything bad.

After all Norton are the experts in preventing computer badness, and OpenAI can't stop blabbing about how much badness their products are causing. A match made in heaven!

dabrez 2 hours ago||
I have been screaming this from the rooftops and everyone ignores me because no one understand what FirecrackerVM is. I am shocked these guys passed basic operating systems, it isn't that novel of a problem. The only slightly novel thing here is that the agents aren't completely sandboxed as the issue is that in order to attempt to give it the entire internet from a research perspective is how you actually can test tool use but this doesn't make it that much more difficult.
dualvariable 4 hours ago|
If frontier AI is so great, why are these frontier labs skipping security basics and making mistakes like these?
pixl97 2 minutes ago|
The defender problem. It's easier to attack than defend. The attacker chooses the time and the place. The defender has to win against all attacks. The attacker just needs a crack.
More comments...