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

Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

guard.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 198 posts

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#151

Post by anal_reactor »

taormina wrote: post #74
anal_reactor wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine an agent being a roommate. They see that toilet paper is running out, they go to the supermarket, they buy more, they charge you money. All without you saying a word. Sure, it might not be your favorite brand, or the price might not be optimal, but realistically, the convenience of not having to think about buying toilet paper is definitely worth the price of having your roommate choose the details. After all…

The idea has been tried before and it failed because people don’t actually want this product at the scale the inventors thought. Amazon has never stopped doing this. Adding an element of indeterminism to the mix doesn’t make this a better product. Imagine what the LLM is going to hallucinate with your credit card attached.

> Imagine what the LLM is going to hallucinate with your credit card attached.

As long as we have free returns, nobody cares.

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#152

Post by BizarroLand »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #108
lynndotpy wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Amazon came out with the "dash" button and then the "Alexa" speakers, I figured they must have expected they'd get some unintended purchases, and that they'd make more profit from those than they'd lose in the people going through the refund process. (That, or they'd learn whether it was profitable, and eat it as an R&D cost if it turned out to be unprofitable.) I think this might be similar. In short, it's not…

I want an AI agent that returns stuff that my other AI agent bought.

I have an AI agent that can make that AI agent for you for $19.95/month or $17.95 with our annual pass

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#153

Post by cjonas »

acdha wrote: post #135
cjonas wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you only give the AI the ability to do what the end user can already do, the risk is extremely low. It's essential no different then building a static web app where the client is connected to API for all operations. It basically just becomes a new way to interface into a application. However... That's not how a lot of people are building. Giving an agentic system sensitive information (like passwords, credit cards…

> If you only give the AI the ability to do what the end user can already do, the risk is extremely low. Just because I can send my money to Belize doesn’t mean it’s safe to give an LLM the ability to do the same. Until there’s a huge breakthrough on actual intelligence giving an LLM attacker controlled inputs is an inherently high-risk activity.

Ya, I didn't mean in the context of hooking up a LLM to control your browser (which is exactly what the article is about so, fair enough).

My point was:

It's not "insecure" for a bank to release an agentic assistant that can perform any of the operating that you, yourself can perform on their app. That includes "send my money to Belize", because at this point, whatever has taken control of your LLM already has direct authentication to the app itself.

It is of course "insecure" for that same agentic system (that the customer controls the input of) to perform any operations that only a teller or branch manager could. However, I've personally seen requests from CEO to do exactly this (not a bank, but similar industry).

The problem with an Agentic Browser, is your essentially opening up the "input" to anyone capable of building a website. As I said in my other comment, it feels like there are some simple ways to solve this tho (allowlist / scopes / etc).

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#154

Post by guywithahat »

jaimebuelta wrote: post #23

I don't understand why we would ever want an agent to buy stuff for us. I understand, for example, search with intent to buy "I want to decorate a room. Find me a drawer, a table and four chairs that can fit in this space in matching colours for less than X dollars" But I want to do the final step to buy. In fact, I want to do the final SELECTION of stuff. How is agent buying groceries superior to have a grocery list…

I recently bought a blood pressure monitor from Amazon, and it took two days because I couldn't buy it at work, can't buy it while driving, couldn't get it at the gym, and was too tired to look into it when I was at home.

The idea of an agent, not owned by the store (who may try to upsell me) that could look into the product and buy one sounds great. Instead of waiting two days I could have just told the AI to run the errand for me while I was at work. I don't know anything about blood pressure monitors and I don't want to learn, so as long as it's <$50 any choice is fine.

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#155

Post by htrp »

BizarroLand wrote: post #152
JKCalhoun wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want an AI agent that returns stuff that my other AI agent bought.

I have an AI agent that can make that AI agent for you for $19.95/month or $17.95 with our annual pass

You mean 179.50 for the annual pass?

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#156

Post by otterley »

mountainb wrote: post #137
otterley wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a lawyer. I understood your first paragraph but didn’t understand the second. It reads like a drive-by shitpost, utterly lacking substance.

I think it has more to do with the various new meanings that have been attached to the word "agent" and the concept of "agency" by software and some parts of west coast culture. Those concepts do not really have much to do with the law of agency. Lawyers don't come up with good ideas; their role is to explain why your good ideas are illegal. There's a good argument that AI agents cannot exercise legal agency. At the…

> I think it has more to do with the various new meanings that have been attached to the word "agent" and the concept of "agency" by software and some parts of west coast culture.

Indeed, agency (the capability to act) and autonomy (the freedom to choose those actions) are separate things.

BTW, attorneys' autonomy varies, depending on the circumstances and what you hired them to do. For example, they can be trustees of a trust you establish.

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#157

Post by GuB-42 »

jaimebuelta wrote: post #23

I don't understand why we would ever want an agent to buy stuff for us. I understand, for example, search with intent to buy "I want to decorate a room. Find me a drawer, a table and four chairs that can fit in this space in matching colours for less than X dollars" But I want to do the final step to buy. In fact, I want to do the final SELECTION of stuff. How is agent buying groceries superior to have a grocery list…

That's because you don't trust the agent, and for good reasons considering the article.

But if you trust the agent, why not let it do the final step? You will accept anyways. Imagine you have a car mechanic you trust, you can just ask him "hey, fix my car" and let him buy whatever parts he needs on your behalf. If he quoted you first, you would say "yes" anyways, so skip that step and get your car repaired as soon as possible. Only if you don't trust him you will ask for a quote and review it, which, if the mechanic is trustworthy is a hassle for both of you.

Some purchases are enjoyable, most of them are not. I don't enjoying doing the groceries. And to continue with the car mechanic theme, I don't really enjoy buying new tires, though I know some people do. So I just ask my mechanic: "if the tires are worn, change them, give me the ones you think are the best". I will probably end up with the most boring option: the same model as before, which is the one recommended by the manufacturer, and that's perfect for me.

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#158

Post by justcallmejm »

jaimebuelta wrote: post #23

I don't understand why we would ever want an agent to buy stuff for us. I understand, for example, search with intent to buy "I want to decorate a room. Find me a drawer, a table and four chairs that can fit in this space in matching colours for less than X dollars" But I want to do the final step to buy. In fact, I want to do the final SELECTION of stuff. How is agent buying groceries superior to have a grocery list…

Consumers don’t need to want it; VCs just need to imagine making money off it.

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#159

Post by BizarroLand »

htrp wrote: post #155
BizarroLand wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an AI agent that can make that AI agent for you for $19.95/month or $17.95 with our annual pass

You mean 179.50 for the annual pass?

Well, that would be $215.40 since there are 12 months in a year *(taxes, title, fees, regulations, donations to our internal charity system, mandatory 17.7% internet utility fee, and tips for our servers are not included in that total)

Re: Scamlexity: When agentic AI browsers get scammed

#160

Post by [deleted] »

geoduck14 wrote: post #140
jordanb wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect part of this is rich people coming up with use cases. If you're rich enough money means nothing but product selection feels like a burden so you have an assistant who does purchasing on your behalf. You want your house stocked with high quality items without having to think of it. For the rest of us, the idea of a robot spending money on our behalf is kinda terrifying.

Thinking about grocery shopping makes me think this need is real, but for poor people. The amount of time that goes into "what food do we need for this week" is really high. An AI tool that connected "food I have" with "food that I want" would be huge.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN