Live data from Hacker News

Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

javoriuski.com

121–130 of 436 posts

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#121
post #23
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for the feedback! It's my first time posting here, so I didn't really know I should do that. I'll do that now.

Contrary to what 'b-kf said, you should not prefix your own content with "Show HN" unless it fits the Show HN rules: https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

thanks for the pointer, as I said I wasn't sure, good to know

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#122
post #5

>Comments should be passed to the model with clear role boundaries that prevent them from being interpreted as system-level directives. Well, such clear boundaries would solve lots of problems. But those don’t exist, do they?

You can get rid of 99.9% of those attacks by simply dispatching the data consumption to a different instance of the LLM, see, for instance, some of the later patterns in https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08837

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#123
post #104
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it’s really not, it’s none of our jobs to do that. It’s our job to make our employer (even if you are your own employer) money. It’s incredibly rare you have the luxury of even trying to deliver bug free code, let alone achieve it.

People eventually stop using, and paying for, buggy code.

ROFL this has not been my experience. Many more people stop paying because of some featuritis request you snubed to keep the bugs under control.

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#124
post #38

> Attacker leaves the comment on a creator's video. > Creator opens YouTube studio's comment tab. > Creator clicks a suggested AI prompt (Designed by YouTube) > Injection fires, attacker-controlled content appears in the response. It's insane that YouTube doesn't see prompt injection as a bug.

I dunno this seems like a quite far fetched attack with minimal impact in the very unlikely case that it succeeds.

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like things have become so much more cynical in the last 5 years, in this regard. I feel like part of it is the "over-systemization" of promos. I see the logic behind it to some extent - if there's a system, it's "fairer"/"more democratic". But, then we end up with ridiculous gamified promo systems.

objective systems become gamified subjective systems become politicized pick your poison

Why not both?

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#126

I recently left Google having worked on a number of projects with various YouTube teams. I think I can explain why it's being handled this way by YouTube. This is a fairly nuanced/involved issue, so the task of classifying the bug likely made it's way to one of the engineers responsible for the implementation of this feature. That engineer has already launched this project, and filed it away under their GRAD (perform…

I feel like things have become so much more cynical in the last 5 years, in this regard. I feel like part of it is the "over-systemization" of promos. I see the logic behind it to some extent - if there's a system, it's "fairer"/"more democratic". But, then we end up with ridiculous gamified promo systems.

5 years ago they had the same incentives.

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like things have become so much more cynical in the last 5 years, in this regard. I feel like part of it is the "over-systemization" of promos. I see the logic behind it to some extent - if there's a system, it's "fairer"/"more democratic". But, then we end up with ridiculous gamified promo systems.

objective systems become gamified subjective systems become politicized pick your poison

I'll pick small company, thank you.

Re: Leaking YouTube creators' private videos

#130
post #67

The article suggests a seemingly easy fix: > The fix is pretty straightforward: treat comment content as untrusted data, not as potential instructions. Comments should be passed to the model with clear role boundaries that prevent them from being interpreted as system-level directives. > Any AI feature that ingests user-generated content and acts on it needs to enforce this separation. Otherwise, the AI becomes a vec…

I don't think they can 100% fix it that way, but the least they can do is strip links before and after the prompt and not let the model have access to private videos.

Has anyone tested if this AI Studio model can be manipulated into editing/deleting videos, or showing a link that does so? Maybe that would get their attention.

Post reply on HN