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

61–70 of 636 posts

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

#61

Post by BoredPositron »

simianwords wrote: post #21
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as a general rule, I don't do business with people who lie to me. You've got a business, and you sent me junk mail, but you made it look like some official government thing to get me to open it? I'm done, just because you lied on the envelope . I don't care how badly I need your service. There's a dozen other places that can provide it; I'll pick one of them rather than you, because you've shown yourself to be…

What’s the lie? It’s just asking to not reveal internal names

You are spamming the whole fucking thread with the same nonsense. It is instructed to hide that the PR was made via Claude Code. I don't know why people who are so AI forward like yourself have such a problem with telling people that they use AI for coding/writing, it's a weirdly insecure look.

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

#62

Post by MadsRC »

stavros wrote: post #47

Can someone clarify how the signing can't be spoofed (or can it)? If we have the source, can't we just use the key to now sign requests from other clients and pretend they're coming from CC itself?

What signing?

Are you referencing the use of Claude subscription authentication (oauth) from non-Claude Code clients?

That’s already possible, nothing prevents you from doing it.

They are detecting it on their backend by profiling your API calls, not by guarding with some secret crypto stuff.

At least that’s how things worked last week xD

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

#63

Post by simianwords »

ossa-ma wrote: post #58
simianwords wrote: post #16

> The multi-agent coordinator mode in coordinatorMode.ts is also worth a look. The whole orchestration algorithm is a prompt, not code. So much for langchain and langraph!! I mean if Anthropic themselves arent using it and using a prompt then what’s the big deal about langchain

Langchain is for model-agnostic composition. Claude Code only uses one interface to hoist its own models so zero need for an abstraction layer. Langgraph is for multi-agent orchestration as state graphs. This isn't useful for Claude Code as there is no multi-agent chaining. It uses a single coordinator agent that spawns subagents on demand. Basically too dynamic to constrain to state graphs.

You may have a point but to drive it further, can you give an example of a thing I can do with langgraph that I can't do with Claude Code?

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

#64

Post by [deleted] »

otterley wrote: post #57
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as a general rule, I don't do business with people who lie to me. You've got a business, and you sent me junk mail, but you made it look like some official government thing to get me to open it? I'm done, just because you lied on the envelope . I don't care how badly I need your service. There's a dozen other places that can provide it; I'll pick one of them rather than you, because you've shown yourself to be…

Out of curiosity, given two code submissions that are completely identical—one written solely by a human and one assisted by AI—why should its provenance make any difference to you? Is it like fine art, where it’s important that Picasso’s hand drew it? Or is it like an instruction manual, where the author is unimportant? Similarly, would you consider it to be dishonest if my human colleague reviewed and made changes…

[deleted]

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

#65

Post by stavros »

MadsRC wrote: post #62
stavros wrote: post #47

Can someone clarify how the signing can't be spoofed (or can it)? If we have the source, can't we just use the key to now sign requests from other clients and pretend they're coming from CC itself?

What signing? Are you referencing the use of Claude subscription authentication (oauth) from non-Claude Code clients? That’s already possible, nothing prevents you from doing it. They are detecting it on their backend by profiling your API calls, not by guarding with some secret crypto stuff. At least that’s how things worked last week xD

I'm referring to this signing bit:

https://alex000kim.com/posts/2026-03-31-claude-code-source-l...

Ah, it seems that Bun itself signs the code. I don't understand how this can't be spoofed.

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

#66

Post by sprobertson »

stavros wrote: post #40
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Undercover mode seems like a way to make contributions to OSS when they detect issues, without accidentally leaking that it was claude-mythos-gigabrain-100000B that figured out the issue

What does non-undercover do? Where does CC leave metadata mainly? I haven't noticed anything.

it likes mentioning itself in commit messages, though you can just tell it not to.

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

#67

Post by simianwords »

BoredPositron wrote: post #61
simianwords wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the lie? It’s just asking to not reveal internal names

You are spamming the whole fucking thread with the same nonsense. It is instructed to hide that the PR was made via Claude Code. I don't know why people who are so AI forward like yourself have such a problem with telling people that they use AI for coding/writing, it's a weirdly insecure look.

I can do that right now with Claude Code without this undercover mode.. In fact I do it many times at work. What's the big deal in this?

Do you not think it is an overreaction to panic like this if I can do exactly what the undercover mode does by simply asking Claude?

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

#68

Post by stavros »

sprobertson wrote: post #66
stavros wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does non-undercover do? Where does CC leave metadata mainly? I haven't noticed anything.

it likes mentioning itself in commit messages, though you can just tell it not to.

Ah, thanks, it hasn't done it for mine so I was wondering if there's something lower-level somehow.

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

#69

Post by mmaunder »

Come on guys. Yet another article distilling the HN discussion in the original post, in the same order the comments appear in that discussion? Here's another since y'all love this stuff: https://venturebeat.com/technology/claude-codes-source-code-...

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

#70

Post by wnevets »

peacebeard wrote: post #14

The name "Undercover mode" and the line `The phrase "Claude Code" or any mention that you are an AI` sound spooky, but after reading the source my first knee-jerk reaction wouldn't be "this is for pretending to be human" given that the file is largely about hiding Anthropic internal information such as code names. I encourage looking at the source itself in order to draw your conclusions, it's very short: https://git…

BAD (never write these):

- "Fix bug found while testing with Claude Capybara"

- "1-shotted by claude-opus-4-6"

- "Generated with Claude Code"

- "Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 "

This makes sense to me about their intent by "UNDERCOVER"

Post reply on HN