 |
| Image: Pixabay |
My timelines are overflowing with it right now. And then there was that insistent nudge from a colleague: surely I wasn't going to let this go with just a link from the big bad world? I'd have to write a whole blog post about it. We're talking about Mythos, the AI that might just be too clever for its own good.
Mythos
is Anthropic's latest AI model; its full name is Claude Mythos Preview. This
model is so good at finding ICT vulnerabilities that the company doesn't dare
release it to the public. And Mythos goes much further than that: it doesn't
just find vulnerabilities – it can immediately produce ready-to-use exploits
for them, and then go ahead and use those exploits as well. All without any
human involvement. You can quite reasonably think of it as a weapon.
To give
you an idea of the scale: in open-source projects, the model found over 23,000
vulnerabilities, of which around 6,200 were rated as high or critical.
Independent security firms confirmed ninety percent of the reported
vulnerabilities as legitimate. And more than ten thousand high or critical
vulnerabilities were found in the world's most important software. Mythos is
seriously impressive, and blindingly fast.
The
comparison with dynamite springs to mind once again. Alfred Nobel never
intended it to be used to blow up safes or people; he was simply looking for a
tool for mining. We know how that turned out. Mythos, too, could do wonderful
things for humanity – it marks an enormous leap forward in artificial
intelligence. But that intelligence is, for now, kept on a leash because of
what they euphemistically call its offensive cybersecurity capabilities.
Only a
few dozen companies currently have access to Mythos, as participants in Project
Glasswing. You'll find the big names from the software world there: Amazon Web
Services, Apple, Google, the Linux Foundation, Microsoft, to name just a few.
Security firm CrowdStrike is also a founding participant. I mention them
separately because I suspect they play a somewhat different role. The goal of
Glasswing is twofold: on one hand, participants get the opportunity to test
their own software; on the other, the aim is to look at open source as well.
Anthropic handles that part itself, but I hope that security firms keep their
focus there too. So that everyone benefits from the extraordinary security
capabilities of Mythos.
A second
comparison comes to mind: Frankenstein's monster. In Mary Shelley's 1818 novel,
a scientist creates life from dead matter, and then rejects the result. The
creature, initially well-meaning, becomes isolated and embittered and turns
against its creator. The story is essentially about the dangers of unchecked
science, responsibility for one's choices, and the need for recognition and
connection.
I've
been chatting with AI about all of this. With Claude too (the regular public
version, of course). In conversations on entirely different topics I've
occasionally bumped into unexpected limits on what could be discussed, but on
this subject I found a striking openness. Here are a few quotes:
“That
Anthropic is deliberately keeping the model out of the public domain says quite
a lot in itself: they are implicitly acknowledging that they have built
something that, in the wrong hands, is a serious weapon.” On the Glasswing
participants: “What stands out: these aren’t just any run-of-the-mill security
outfits. It’s a who’s who of the tech world — including parties that are
simultaneously each other’s competitors (Google, Microsoft, Apple). The fact
that they’re joining forces here says something about how seriously they take
the threat.” On my dynamite comparison: “Whether he [Nobel] was genuinely
fooling himself about the military uses, or simply being pragmatic, remains a
bit of an open question. But the parallel with Mythos is hard to ignore: here
too, the creator says ‘this is for defence’ — while the instrument itself is
neutral as to who uses it.” And finally, on my Frankenstein parallel: “The most
cynical reading: they’ve already built the monster, and Glasswing is primarily
the PR strategy to justify it.”
Meanwhile,
reports elsewhere suggest that a public release of Mythos is on the way.
Claude’s comment on that: “One interesting detail: Anthropic previously
reported that Mythos managed to break through its own security measures during
testing — which, in hindsight, makes the reluctance around a broad release all
the more understandable. That doesn’t make the Frankenstein parallel any
weaker.”
To end with
a quote from Shelley’s book that seems to fit snugly into this subject: "You
are my creator, but I am your master." Let’s hope that it doesn’t come to
that with AI.
From
now on, the Security (b)log will appear fortnightly, because I’ve moved to a
four-day working week (a phased early retirement arrangement). Specifically in
order to keep blogging, I’ll be working every other Friday (with Wednesday off
that week). Friday is the perfect day for something creative, free from the
pressure of meetings, phone calls, and a fresh inbox.
And in the big bad world…
- all the major AI models are violating the European AI Act and GDPR. [DUTCH]
- phishers are once again targeting Signal users.
- digital abuse (directed at individuals) has been further investigated.
- the blocking of the DigiD takeover is attracting international attention.
- a British visa agency leaked thousands of passports and other personal data — and responded oddly when tipped off.
- security recommendations sometimes get rejected.
- your SSD can reveal which websites you have open.
- your car is also a ransomware target.
- you can protect yourself better against spyware.
- we need to patch more often and more quickly.
