3 ms·
Will agents hack everything?
- arresin 11mo agoAGENTS ITS AGENTIC ITS USES AGENTS YEAH. I’m running plenty of AGENTS. AGENTS. A G E N T I C.
- arresin 11mo agoAgentic
- danenania 11mo agoIt is definitely a buzzword, but agents also are legitimately changing many fundamental things about security, so…
- arresin 11mo agoSecret agents? Real estate agents? Or LLMs with system prompts and function calls? It’s just cringe how much I’ve heard the term and how unspecific it is.
- danenania 11mo agoI wrote this for my company’s blog about the recent hack that Anthropic reported, where a China-linked group carried out an attack against many targets using Claude Code. It goes into the tension between capabilities and safety (from a security perspective) and why it’s not an easy problem to fix. Would love to hear your thoughts!
- verdverm 11mo agoAnother post hit HN yesterday which claims that 1. No part of the attack required an LLM or agent, it used open source malware anyone can run 2. A more probable explanation is that claude provided a remote execution environment that is less likely to be blocked because the originating source is a US ip instead of typical malware ips What are your thoughts on this (paraphrased) analysis? (edit) apparently Anthropic has corrected the scale of the attack > Corrected an error about the speed of the attack: not "thousands of requests per second" but "thousands of requests, often multiple per second"
- danenania 11mo agoI think that makes sense. The change is not really in the kind of attack—anything the agent can do a human attacker could also do—but in the amount of effort and expertise required to design and scale up the attack. It’s a quantitative rather than qualitative change… but also, “quantity has a quality all its own”.