2 ms·

That video suggests that RTDEV-92030 was the fix for the issue - but https://docs.jfrog.com/releases/docs/artifactory-self-managed-releases https://docs.jfrog.c

by simonw 3mo ago

That video suggests that RTDEV-92030 was the fix for the issue - but https://docs.jfrog.com/releases/docs/artifactory-self-managed-releases https://docs.jfrog.com/releases/docs/artifactory-self-manage... says that issue was resolved in a 15 July 2026 release of Artifactory, which doesn't fit our timeline - that was prior to the original Hugging Face post on 16 July which was several days before OpenAI had confessed.

35876 3mo ago
[dead]
- K3UL 3mo ago
  This seems unlikely as it would mean JFrog knew the vulnerability before OpenAI, which this blog posts clearly says the opposite
NooneAtAll3 3mo ago
Are you suggesting issue should've been resolved *after* it was made public?
- simonw 3mo ago
  I'm suggesting that you can't release a fix for an issue that hasn't been reported to you yet.
lovasoa 3mo ago
The timeline is indeed a little bit fuzzy, I haven't found a precise chronology, neither from HuggingFace nor from OpenAI. HF says the hack happened "over a weekend", so probably July 11th-12th. Do you think it took OpenAI a week to realize what happened ? Maybe when HF published their blog post on the 15th, OpenAI already knew something had happened, had started to investigate, and already reported the issue to JFrog ? But looking at your other comment in the thread, I agree that CVE-2026-65925 and CVE-2026-66014 are better candidates. Taking a step back, so many basic vulnerabilities in a security-oriented product just makes the headline "agent autonomously escaped containment" sound a little less spectacular.
- simonw 3mo ago
  > Do you think it took OpenAI a week to realize what happened ? Apparently it did take them a while. This report here https://cloudsecurityalliance.org/artifacts/hugging-face-ciso-post-mortem https://cloudsecurityalliance.org/artifacts/hugging-face-cis... includes extra details from a conversation Hugging Face: > The intrusion lasted about four days: two days were spent on reconnaissance, followed by one silent day and a final day of intense activity. That suggests OpenAI didn't spot what was happening for four days.

by simonw 3mo ago

35876 3mo ago

[dead]

K3UL 3mo ago
This seems unlikely as it would mean JFrog knew the vulnerability before OpenAI, which this blog posts clearly says the opposite

NooneAtAll3 3mo ago

Are you suggesting issue should've been resolved *after* it was made public?

simonw 3mo ago
I'm suggesting that you can't release a fix for an issue that hasn't been reported to you yet.

lovasoa 3mo ago

The timeline is indeed a little bit fuzzy, I haven't found a precise chronology, neither from HuggingFace nor from OpenAI. HF says the hack happened "over a weekend", so probably July 11th-12th. Do you think it took OpenAI a week to realize what happened ? Maybe when HF published their blog post on the 15th, OpenAI already knew something had happened, had started to investigate, and already reported the issue to JFrog ? But looking at your other comment in the thread, I agree that CVE-2026-65925 and CVE-2026-66014 are better candidates. Taking a step back, so many basic vulnerabilities in a security-oriented product just makes the headline "agent autonomously escaped containment" sound a little less spectacular.

simonw 3mo ago
> Do you think it took OpenAI a week to realize what happened ? Apparently it did take them a while. This report here https://cloudsecurityalliance.org/artifacts/hugging-face-ciso-post-mortem https://cloudsecurityalliance.org/artifacts/hugging-face-cis... includes extra details from a conversation Hugging Face: > The intrusion lasted about four days: two days were spent on reconnaissance, followed by one silent day and a final day of intense activity. That suggests OpenAI didn't spot what was happening for four days.