Thread

1. openasocket · 1790438988 · focus · HN ↗

   One thing I find surprising is everyone is talking about the danger of an agent going rogue but not the danger of an agent getting hijacked. These companies are making this clusters with thousands of agents running at once, with frontier, often not-yet-released, quality models and massive computational and network resources. And these things are given access to whatever they want on the Internet. Even if that was restricted to read-only access to the Internet, that’s still exposing the agents to untrusted input. All it takes is some bad actor creating a website that attracts one of these agent swarms and doing prompt injection. Then your fancy AI cluster will start doing whatever that attacker wants. And the fact that we have multiple examples of these swarms trying to coordinate on random corners of the internet shows they are almost pre-disposed to it.

   Now it feels like companies are treating these breakouts like a chance for PR. I don’t think that will change until their swarm gets corrupted by some random black hat to do en-masse spear phishing or something

   1. theptip · 1790441024 · focus · HN ↗

      > these things are given access to whatever they want on the Internet

      They are intended to be fully sandboxed and not have direct internet access. Things like package managers are run from internal proxies.

      The environments are built to be as reproducible as possible.

      But yeah, the serious folks have been talking about rogue clusters for a long time, eg see Ajeya Cotra’s pod with Dwarkesh.

      1. ozozozd · 1790444426 · focus · HN ↗

         Fully sandboxed means no Internet access. You can also specify which packages are accessible and put it in the sandbox. Or you can be lazy and give them access to a package manager that had Internet access, but you don’t get to say “we intended to fully sandbox it.”

         Not sure why the reproducibility is a requirement that would contribute to the security. Not that fully sandboxing is harder with reproducibility, but that is a moot point when reproducibility isn’t a requirement.

         OP pointed out clusters being hijacked specifically being a bigger concern than rogue clusters, your comment hijacks their comment to talk about “rogue clusters.” Or perhaps this is a promotion for Dwarkesh?

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.