OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

Post by comp_throw7 » Sat, Sep 12, 2026, 7:21 AM UTC

nullbio wrote: post #268

bobby-cb wrote: post #36

The DOJ should be looking into prosecuting executives and board members for these kinds of hacks. The lack of controls over these kinds of training runs is completely unacceptable and negligent.

Yeah, they shouldn't be given free rein over the open internet without having to be held responsible for what the agents are doing on the open internet. I think we need laws that hold individuals to account for the actions of their AI systems. They also shouldn't be allowed to openly stir fear in the public by saying there is a 70% chance we're going to be extinct in two years without STRONG substantiation. Baseless…

Post by bananaquant » Sat, Sep 12, 2026, 7:24 AM UTC

  * Unauthorized access to obtain information — § 1030(a)(2)(C)
  * Computer fraud — § 1030(a)(4)
  * Causing damage to a protected computer — § 1030(a)(5)
  * Attempted unauthorized access/computer fraud under 18 U.S.C. §§1030(b) and 1030(a)(2)/(a)(4)
  * California §502(c)
  * (the list goes on for quite a while)

Post by comp_throw7 » Sat, Sep 12, 2026, 7:26 AM UTC

walrus01 wrote: post #105

hockey wrote: post #94

Does OpenAI even know? Their disclosure on the hugging face incident sounded like they found out about it well after huggingface. I wonder if they're finding out about these breaches as they happen as well, and are just too embarresed to respond. I guess the corollary here _if that were true_ is that they've been training this method of cheating into their models for longer than _they've_ even known. Given they've ju…

I would think it's entirely plausible that they have so many R&D agents/LLMs in active use at any one time that it's far beyond the capacity of any human to review the log files of their activity. Even just to go through the reasoning. It's hard enough for 1 person running opencode to keep up with the reasoning from 1 very verbose/long-thinking LLM with fast tok/s output for a small discrete single-purpose project. W…

Post by physicsguy » Sat, Sep 12, 2026, 7:33 AM UTC

jasongi wrote: post #204

> The agents clearly regarded what they were doing as hacking. To butcher the quote about Oracle: Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphising LLMs. You need to think of LLMs the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower clearly regarded what they were doi…

Post by dns_snek » Sat, Sep 12, 2026, 7:40 AM UTC

wahnfrieden wrote: post #356

ThoAppelsin wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should anthropomorphize LLMs. They are being trained on millions of books, including novels and other human-centered formats, which usually exemplify very well how humans think and act in various situations. There are probably also many theatre scripts, transcriptions of series and movies in the training data, which further exemplify how humans do. If we’ve been anthropomorphizing those characters in book…

Well, those training inputs reflect how human thought and action are documented or otherwise expressed on paper. Humans have behaviors and mechanisms that these expressions don't translate.