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

Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

promptarmor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–419 of 419 posts

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#411

Post by LoganDark »

cbarrick wrote: post #354
OoooooooO wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sudo run "some link to a shell script" Never understood why that became so common place ...

It's not really different than downloading a .msi or .exe installer on Windows and running it. Or downloading a .pkg installer on macOS and running it (or running a program supplied in a .dmg). Or downloading a .deb or .rpm on Linux and running it. It's all whether or not you trust the entity supplying the installer, be it your package manager or a third party. At least with shell scripts, you have the opportunity to…

It is different: you give it sudo immediately so it doesn't have to ask.

Of course, many installers ask for administrator access anyway...

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#412

Post by cbarrick »

LoganDark wrote: post #411
cbarrick wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really different than downloading a .msi or .exe installer on Windows and running it. Or downloading a .pkg installer on macOS and running it (or running a program supplied in a .dmg). Or downloading a .deb or .rpm on Linux and running it. It's all whether or not you trust the entity supplying the installer, be it your package manager or a third party. At least with shell scripts, you have the opportunity to…

It is different: you give it sudo immediately so it doesn't have to ask. Of course, many installers ask for administrator access anyway...

I don't think it's functionally different if you write sudo on the command line or if the installer uses sudo in the script.

As you said, most installers need to place binaries in privileged locations anyway.

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#413

Post by OJFord »

eru wrote: post #400
OJFord wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They mean it went down as in stopped working, had some outage; so you've tried to use it as a token revocation service, but it doesn't work (or not as quickly as you expect).

Sure, that's a valid worry. Though that's not all that different from a special purpose public token revocation service: they can also go down.

True, just more to rely on with the scanning too I suppose.

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#414

Post by filoleg »

worldsavior wrote: post #91
filoleg wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just try calculating how many RTX 5090 GPUs by volume would fit in a rectangular bounding box of a small sedan car, and you will understand how. Honda Civic (2026) sedan has 184.8” (L) × 70.9” (W) × 55.7” (H) dimensions for an exterior bounding box. Volume of that would be ~12,000 liters. An RTX 5090 GPU is 304mm × 137mm, with roughly 40mm of thickness for a typical 2-slot reference/FE model. This would make the boun…

What about what's around the GPU? Motherboard etc.

I didn’t do the napkin math on it earlier, because I don’t believe it really matters for making the point I was making.

I don’t care about looking up real numbers, so I will just overestimate heavily. Let’s say that for a large enough number of GPUs, the overhead of all the surrounding equipment would be around 20% (amortized).

So you can just take the number of GPUs I calculated in my previous comment, multiply by 0.8, and you get your answer.

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#415

Post by antonvs »

losthobbies wrote: post #324
antonvs wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RBAC doesn't help. Prompt injection is when someone who is authorized causes the LLM to access external data that's needed for their query, and that external data contains something intended to provoke a response from the LLM. Even if you prevent the LLM from accessing external data - e.g. no web requests - it doesn't stop an authorized user, who may not understand the risks, from pasting or uploading some external d…

If the LLM is running under a role, which it should be, then RBAC can help.

The issue is if you want to prevent your LLM from actually doing anything other than responding to text prompts with text output, then you have to give it permissions to do those things.

No-one is particularly concerned about prompt injection for pure chatbots (although they can still trick users into doing risky things). The main issue is with agents, who by definition perform operations on behalf of users, typically with similar roles to the users, by necessity.

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#416

Post by nutjob2 »

delaminator wrote: post #410
nutjob2 wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Australia locked up millions of people in their homes and forced them into dangerous medical procedures. Your comically bad faith description of Aus covid measures is pure nonsense. > Obesity kills 10x more Americans than guns. And? Obesity kills roughly the same number of people in other countries but guns kill 40 times more people in the US than other countries.

> Authorised workers had to be vaccinated or couldn't attend work onsite. Those who refused could face disciplinary proceedings including dismissal. > The mandates rendered vaccination against COVID a condition of employment. Anyone who refused to be vaccinated could therefore be subject to disciplinary proceedings, including dismissal. Australia | USA | UK Vaccine passports for venues: Australia = Widespread | USA =…

Again, so what? Your claim is says "forced" and "dangerous" but you provide no evidence. You've made your opinion clear, but that's all it is. That the Aus government did something different proves, and shows, nothing.

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#417

Post by kmaitreys »

baby wrote: post #406
kmaitreys wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This analogy makes no sense. Years ago you gave them the ability to do something. Today you're conditioning them to not use that ability and instead depend on a blackbox.

It's all blackboxes

Your incompetence doesn't imply everybody else's.

Re: Claude Cowork exfiltrates files

#418

Post by worldsavior »

filoleg wrote: post #414
worldsavior wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about what's around the GPU? Motherboard etc.

I didn’t do the napkin math on it earlier, because I don’t believe it really matters for making the point I was making. I don’t care about looking up real numbers, so I will just overestimate heavily. Let’s say that for a large enough number of GPUs, the overhead of all the surrounding equipment would be around 20% (amortized). So you can just take the number of GPUs I calculated in my previous comment, multiply by 0…

This is not 20% , it's 100%+.
Post reply on HN