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

The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

alex000kim.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 636 posts

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#461

Post by catlifeonmars »

__float wrote: post #353
datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaves you open to vulnerabilities in overnight builds of NPM packages that increasingly happen due to LLM slop?

You can set a minimum age for packages ( https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/reference/supply-ch... ), though that's not perfect (and becomes less effective if everyone uses it).

> becomes less effective if everyone uses it

I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. Exposure and discovery aren’t that tightly correlated. Maybe there’s a small effect, but I think it is outweighed by the fact that blast radius and spread is reduced while buying time for discovery.

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#463

Post by mananaysiempre »

altmanaltman wrote: post #435
spacechild1 wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIUC, a person can only claim copyright if they have significantly transformed the output. Unaltered LLM output is not copyrightable per US court decisions. The whole thing is a legal mess. How do you know the LLM did not reproduce existing code? There is an ongoing legal battle in German between GEMA and OpenAI because ChatGPT reproduced parts of existing song lyrics. A court in Munich has found that this violates G…

I think you're misunderstanding copyright and ownership. A copyright over code means that ONLY you can use that code, and nobody else; otherwise, you can sue them. For example, if you are an arist, you want to protect your IP this way. Yes, AI generated code is not copyrightable but so is most code in general. It is very hard to truly get a copyright for a piece of code. But just because you don't have copyright to s…

(Not a lawyer.)

Huh? Normal property law is plainly not applicable to a non-rival good like information (unlike for instance a physical DVD: if someone takes a DVD from me, I don’t have it anymore). “Intellectual property” is, but it is not so much a legal regime as confusing shorthand for a number of distinct ones:

- Trademark law, which applies to markings on copies rather than copies themselves;

- Trade secret law, which stops applying when the information escapes into the wild through the secret-holder’s own actions;

- Patent law, which definitionally only applies to public knowledge as an incentive to not keep it secret instead;

- Publicity rights, which only apply to depictions or discussions of natural persons;

- Moral rights, which are mostly about being recognized as the author and even in their strongest incarnations do not restrict unmodified copies;

- Database right, which isn’t applicable as we’re not talking about a compendium of things, and anyway does not exist in the US and most other places outside the EU;

- Copyright, which you’ve conceded is not applicable here.

There’s no “intellectual property” distinct from these things, and none of them are relevant.

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#465

Post by ach9l »

internetter wrote: post #93
ArvinJA wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this really the use-case? I imagine the regex is good for a dashboard. You can collect matches per 1000 prompts or something like that, and see if the number grows or declines over time. If you miss some negative sentiment it shouldn't matter unless the use of that specific word doesn't correlate over time with other negative words and is also popular enough to have an impact on the metric.

When you read the code, what you propose is actually its exclusive use... logging.

have you heard about rlhf?

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#466

Post by yard2010 »

system2 wrote: post #405
electriclove wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched to Codex out of frustration with Claude Code and it has been surprisingly similar for my web and mobile coding needs

Except for censoring. It didn't allow me to use a screencapture library, thinking I was going to hack the world.

I sleep good at night, knowing that chatgpt saves me from the world wide web hackers

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#467

Post by cess11 »

Alifatisk wrote: post #444
tdb7893 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If those tools are writing the code then in general I do expect that to be included in the PR! Through my whole career I've seen PRs where people noted that code that was generated (people have been generating code since long before LLMs). It's useful context unless you've gone over the generated code and understand it and it is the same quality as if you wrote it yourself (which in my experience is the case where it…

> people have been generating code since long before LLMs How? LSTM?

There are many techniques. You're most likely to come across things like declarative DSL:s and macros, then there are things like JAXB and similar tooling that generates code from data schemas, and some people script around data sources to glue boilerplate and so on.

Arguably snippet collections belong to this genre.

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#468

Post by catlifeonmars »

butvacuum wrote: post #183
jamietanna wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, there are some very good reasons[0] that you would do better to track your usage of LLM derived code (primarily for legal reasons) [0]: https://www.jvt.me/posts/2026/02/25/llm-attribute/

legally speaking.. if you're not sure of the risk- you don't document it.

Seems ethical

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#469

Post by yard2010 »

slashdave wrote: post #412
reenorap wrote: post #330

What effect will this have on their IPO? Can someone take the code and make a clone?

What? No. Not legally. You know. Copyright and all that.

What do you mean copyright? If I torrent this and train a model that changes every second m in a sentence to n can I ship as my software?

Re: The Claude Code Source Leak: fake tools, frustration regexes, undercover mode

#470

Post by cess11 »

ndriscoll wrote: post #265
mikkupikku wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A whole lot of people find LLM code to be strictly objectionable, for a variety of reasons. We can debate the validity of those reasons, but I think that even if those reasons were all invalid, it would still be unethical to deceive people by a deliberate lie of omission. I don't turn it off, and I don't think other people should either.

My tools just don't add such comments. I don't know why I would care to add that information. I want my commits to be what and why, not what editor someone used. It seems like cruft to me. Why would I add noise to my data to cater to someone's neuroticism? At least at my workplace though, it's just assumed now that you are using the tools.

What editor you are using has no effect on things like copyright, while software that synthesises code might.

In commercial settings you are often required to label your produce and inform about things like 'Made in China' or possible adverse effects of consumption.

Post reply on HN