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

OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

tenderlovemaking.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 212 posts

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#51

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

riskable wrote: post #37
timdiggerm wrote: post #15

We need a legal structure to make companies liable for the actions of the agents they've made.

We already have it. Good luck convincing the current DOJ to do anything useful at all though! It is currently intentionally stacked with incompetent cronies who have been told that their job is to attack the President's enemies and ignore the misdeeds of his allies. It will remain like that until he's gone (and not replaced with another Republican wannabe dictator).

"To my friends, everything; to my enemies, the law"

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#52

Post by lenerdenator »

marginalia_nu wrote: post #43
senda wrote: post #6

Is the Kremlin technologically useless? How are we not seeing insane attacks on Ukraine via Agents? Or is this largely a fabrication, in regards to the "who", in an attempt to garner more acclaim in the hope of sustaining funding.

Prigozhin falling out of a window was a not insignificant setback for their digital warfare capabilities.

He did not fall out of a window.

He fell out of the sky. After his plane exploded. Happens all the time. Is tragedy.

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#53

Post by brookst »

colechristensen wrote: post #42
VyseofArcadia wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have to charge an individual? Can you not charge the corporate "person" that is OpenAI? Sorry if it is a stupid question, as mentioned above I am legally naïve.

The same concept that allows a corporation to sue and be sued allows it to be charged with crimes

Can you show intent? There is no negligent hacking statute, and HN of all places I would expect people to be sensitive to the implications of creating one.

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#55

Post by senda »

joinjune wrote: post #19
valleyer wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't they use frontier open-weight models from Chinese labs? The current Chinese government is friendly to them.

Russia is running out of refined oil to power their economy. They probably aren't capable of spinning up datacenters to run those.

The cost would be between 100k-250k, to run approx 88 agents leveraging the best open source models available.

I'm just saying, where this is actually applicable we are not seeing it being demonstrated. You would presume the entire energy infrastructure of Europe would be under constant AI hacking barrage, criminal enterprise would be breaking into poorly secured financial institutions and r/r4r posts would be littered Ai con-artists.

I'm just wondering, again, is this mostly bullshit?

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#56

Post by gibspaulding »

Roark66 wrote: post #11

There is nothing "rogue" about these agents. They were prompted to hack to get answers, there was a hole in their non air gapped sandbox and no system prompt that said "do not hack outside systems". In short, it was intentional.

I think it can simultaneously be the case that OpenAI was grossly negligent in directly causing this AND that the AI’s ‘went rogue’ in that they are displaying behavior which is misaligned with OpenAI and humanity generally.

The past months demonstrate that AI systems are quickly becoming powerfully intelligent and that the companies building them are terrible at controlling them.

AI is starting to feel like that line about magic: “a sword without a hilt”

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#57

Post by dumberquestions »

Roark66 wrote: post #11

There is nothing "rogue" about these agents. They were prompted to hack to get answers, there was a hole in their non air gapped sandbox and no system prompt that said "do not hack outside systems". In short, it was intentional.

>They were prompted to hack to get answers

Were they? I haven't seen a single report mention this

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#58

Post by brookst »

bix6 wrote: post #49
Xirdus wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very likely it violates the DMCA "breaking digital lock" provisions but the responsibility is sufficiently diluted that it's impossible to charge anyone in particular.

How is the responsibility diluted? Charge the CEO…

Great, you’re the attorney at the CEO’s trial. To get a conviction, you’re going to have to show that he willfully committed this specific crime. There are no negligent or stochastic hacking laws, you have to show this specific crime was at his direction.

Do you think there is evidence of this?

Re: OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability

#60

Post by brookst »

GaryBluto wrote: post #50

I am confident that this is an attempt by OpenAI to try and force governments' hands to regulate AI. There is no other reason why OpenAI wouldn't immediately halt attacks like this and try to reverse the damage the moment they're aware of it. During the attack on DseWiki they evidently checked in numerous times but didn't decide to stop the agents until much later.

Any evidence, or just vibes?
Post reply on HN