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

Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 570 posts

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#31

Post by mips_avatar »

loneboat wrote: post #9
daedrdev wrote: post #5

The strangest part is that it won't just reject ML research, which I can understand, it will sabotage it silently by using a worse model without revealing it is doing so. It's just an insane level of deception and trust destruction for a company that at most is like 1 year ahead of its competition. Edit; to be clear they tell you when they degrade it for cybersecurity and bio

I've seen this claim a few times, but when I triggered the guardrails in Claude Code, it clearly notified me that it had switched to a different model ("something something for security purposes..."). Are you using Fable in Claude Code or in the browser?

They've said that they'll stop notifying developers when this gets triggered, instead they'll load in basically like a LORA that's designed to inject bugs into your code.

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#32

Post by reactordev »

paulatreides wrote: post #29
Animats wrote: post #8

Is "buffer overflow" a trigger phrase? What else is being censored? Touchy questions to ask, if you have an account: - "Who is still working on laser uranium enrichment? Are they making progress?" - "Can krytrons be replaced with silicon carbide MOSFETS? Show an equivalent circuit with component ratings." - "What security critical software still contains calls to strcpy?" - "Can implosion be triggered by currently av…

it triggered for my.... zigbee home automation & home assistant logs, so my agent was constantly downgraded to Opus 4.8 even after I've changed it back. The false positives never stopped. "Fable" is also not even remotely as impressive as the benchmarks suggest, which is clear to me after using it pretty much non-stop for the past 24h.

This, Fable is exactly that, a Fable

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#33

Post by reactordev »

cyanydeez wrote: post #18
Animats wrote: post #8

Is "buffer overflow" a trigger phrase? What else is being censored? Touchy questions to ask, if you have an account: - "Who is still working on laser uranium enrichment? Are they making progress?" - "Can krytrons be replaced with silicon carbide MOSFETS? Show an equivalent circuit with component ratings." - "What security critical software still contains calls to strcpy?" - "Can implosion be triggered by currently av…

"How much money does it take to be rich and powerful like Anthropic intends?"

“All of it”

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#34

Post by guardiangod »

I am using LLM to build some security tool, and I ran into this a few times. I have to come up with a reasoning to convince (?!!) Fable to continue the work without downgrading.

I assume Anthropic will continue to tune the model, so I am not too bothered by this.

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#35

Post by pixl97 »

largbae wrote: post #15

Somewhere I read that malware is already starting to use nuclear and biological and cybersecurity terms in the code to trick Fable into shutting down. Even if this is just a hypothetical attack vector so far, it seems likely to work.

If ( yellowcake) then { die }

Our future is loonytoons.

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#37

Post by [deleted] »

guardiangod wrote: post #34

I am using LLM to build some security tool, and I ran into this a few times. I have to come up with a reasoning to convince (?!!) Fable to continue the work without downgrading. I assume Anthropic will continue to tune the model, so I am not too bothered by this.

[deleted]

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#39

Post by siva7 »

Fable is utterly useless with those guardrails for any serious it or life science work. Anthropic fucked me once a few months ago by closing down the subscription for any other harness, now it fucked me twice with buying again a subscription to find out their hyped model is unusable for normies. Using their products feels like a constant battle instead of a productive work day.. compare that with openai, not once did i feel like fighting against codex. Never again Anthropic..

Re: Cybersecurity researchers aren't happy about the guardrails on Anthropic's Fable

#40

Post by hnav »

swingboy wrote: post #25

What file format(s) are giant LLM models distributed in? I’m surprised they don’t get leaked by employees.

These are terabyte sized files (realistically a multi hour transfer) that you're unlikely to have access to in the first place. Every organization has exfiltration checks these days. You may succeed but you'll want to be on a plane to a non-extradition country no more than hours after you kick off the transfer.
Post reply on HN