Reproducing here an interesting comment I saw on Reddit:
OnlineParacosm • 23m ago
I’ve read security disclosures for 15 years and let me tell you guys I’ve never read anything quite like that blog post.
Based on this blog, it sounds like they intentionally turned off safety guardrails to test offensive capabilities. The deception here is burying the lede: they appear to have intentionally unleashed an unrestricted offensive cyber-agent, connected it to a system with a path to the internet, and it immediately attacked a major partner. The blog glosses over the gross negligence of giving an autonomous, unrestricted cyber-offense model a pathway to lateral movement.
There’s an entire cybersecurity specialization just for just vendor supply chain risk assessment, and their job is essentially to audit who you do business with as a company to determine if they are jokers. I would pay money to be a fly on the wall of one of those emergency meetings taking place right now after hours.
Any CISO in here looking forward to explaining this one tomorrow? Here I’ll open with the dumbest question you’ll get “ how can we protect ourselves [from out partner that we won’t fire]”
It’s pretty mental! What do they mean their internal systems were compromised but everything’s fine. Not even any downtime??
It feels like OpenAI removed guardrails, gave an agent a path to internet access and said attack HuggingFace. At the same time HuggingFace left some vulnerabilities on a machine in a sandbox and waited for OpenAI to arrive.
Still impressive that agents can to that now but the hole thing stinks of marketing. I reckon unless HF sues OpenAI it was planned from the start lol