Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 921 posts

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#231

Post by buzzerbetrayed »

tptacek wrote: post #151
conradkay wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in a slightly indirect manner. Claude is writing a ton of code, and therefore creating a lot of security vulnerabilities.

That's not what's happening here. This announcement is about the velocity with which Claude finds vulnerabilities in already-existing software.

Software already exists that has been written by Claude. They absolutely are selling the means to write software, and the means to securing the insecure software. At least for the time being. In the future Mythos will probably just make it possible to prompt good software from the start.

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#232

Post by SubiculumCode »

pizlonator wrote: post #154

It's messed up that Anthropic simultaneously claims to be a public benefit copro and is also picking who gets to benefit from their newly enhanced cybersecurity capabilities. It means that the economic benefit is going to the existing industry heavyweights. (And no, the Linux Foundation being in the list doesn't imply broad benefit to OSS. Linux Foundation has an agenda and will pick who benefits according to what is…

That can simultaneously be true, but the best of bad options (if excluding destroying the model altogether). These models may prove quite dangerous. That they did this instead of selling their services to every company at a huge premium says a lot about Antheopic's culture.

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#234

Post by dist-epoch »

dakolli wrote: post #107

I guess we can throw out the idea that AGI is going to be democratized. In this case a sufficiently powerful model has been built and the first thing they do is only give AWS, Microsoft, Oracle ect ect access. If AGI is going to be a thing its only going to be a thing, its only going to be a thing for fortune 100 companies.. However, my guess is this is mostly the typical scare tactic marketing that Dario loves to pu…

The plan of Elon Musk for Macrohard is to replace all software companies with it, when they get AGI.

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#235

Post by lobochrome »

rakel_rakel wrote: post #196

> On the global stage, state-sponsored attacks from actors like China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia have threatened to compromise the infrastructure that underpins both civilian life and military readiness. AITA for thinking that PRISM was probably the state sponsored program affecting civilian life the most? And that one state is missing from the list here?

How did PRISM affect civilian life?

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#236

Post by baq »

pizlonator wrote: post #222
baq wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in that case in particular it led to 80 years of relatively calm geopolitics kinetically, all things considered. I'm not sure I want to live through an AI cold war, but it sure seems I don't get to choose.

> relatively calm geopolitics kinetically Relative to what? There's this trend in history that every hundred years there's a giant blow up, lots of violence, followed by peace. It's likely that we would have had 80 years of relative calm due to that cycle even if nukes hadn't happened

> Relative to what?

to WW1 and WW2.

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#237

Post by [deleted] »

_1100 wrote: post #206
pizlonator wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't trust a corpo to choose what is "most critical". That's what's messed up about it.

That is a fine stance to hold but some facts are still true regardless of your view on large businesses. For example, it will benefit more people to secure Microsoft or Amazon services than it would be to secure a smaller, less corporate player in those same service ecosystems. You could go on to argue that the second order effects of improving one service provider over another chooses who gets to play, but that is t…

[deleted]

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#238

Post by az226 »

hector_vasquez wrote: post #178
pizlonator wrote: post #154

It's messed up that Anthropic simultaneously claims to be a public benefit copro and is also picking who gets to benefit from their newly enhanced cybersecurity capabilities. It means that the economic benefit is going to the existing industry heavyweights. (And no, the Linux Foundation being in the list doesn't imply broad benefit to OSS. Linux Foundation has an agenda and will pick who benefits according to what is…

Releasing the model to bad actors at the same time as the major OS, browser, and security companies would be one idea. But some might consider that "messed up" too, whatever you mean by that. But in terms of acting in the public benefit, it seems consistent to work with companies that can make significant impact on users' security. The stated goal of Project Glasswing is to "secure the world's most critical software,…

You can release it with cyber capabilities refusal, they gets unlocked when you apply for approval.

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#239

Post by blazespin »

tptacek wrote: post #134
josh-sematic wrote: post #86

Must be nice to be in a position to sell both disease and cure.

That's exactly not what they're doing. They aren't creating operating system vulnerabilities. They're telling you about ones that already existed.

Dario is big on beating china, and no doubt he believes cyber security is how to do that. You can tell, but anthropic is sht at everything else. Nobody uses it for real research.

Re: Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

#240

Post by Gigachad »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #227
Aperocky wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's assuming the model is actually as good as they say it is. Given the amount of AI researchers over the past 3 years claiming supernatural capability from the LLM they have built, my bayesian skepticism is through the roof.

Anthropic has behaved the least like this of the AI companies.

They made a claim that 100% of code would be AI generated in a year, over a year ago.
Post reply on HN