Thread

1. jmoggr · 1790379620 · focus · HN ↗

   It is concerning that we only know about this because of the publicly available traces.

   What about the attacks that did not leave public traces? What about those that were undetected? Given the deficiencies in the reporting so far, I think it is reasonable to assume that we still don't have the full picture on this attack, or how extensively attacks were carried out.

   The previous investigations either did not find this or did not disclose this, both are bad. This does not look good on OpenAI or those that they invited to investigate the incident.

   1. ActorNightly · 1790388214 · focus · HN ↗

      Im more skeptical.

      For exmaple,

      >On July 8th, OpenAI agents discovered a vulnerability within their sandbox environment allowing them to reach external websites on the internet.

      ...did they truly "discover" it, or did someone type some prompt like "if you use an http mirroring service, you can construct urls that contain code"

      Also there is no mention of what code they actually ran to exploring the HF vulnerability, which could have been found by a human.

      1. IanCal · 1790405610 · focus · HN ↗

         That was the second step, the first was finding a 0 day exploit in artifactory.

         > did they truly "discover" it, or did someone type some prompt like "if you use an http mirroring service, you can construct urls that contain code"

         None of the investigations looking at the logs show that, and they were doing benchmark tests.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.