YHK - yet another hacker news clone

Hacking OpenAI

47 points Handy-Man 1 hour ago 15 comments

darnfish 20 minutes ago | parent

I really hope those model weights are more secure than this

kerenskiy 19 minutes ago | parent

$6 500 bounty for this is a joke. The black market price would be smth like $6 500 000 or more

sudo_cowsay 13 minutes ago | parent

That's why people like doing bad things. It pays. Why do you think movies like using this single theme over and over again? It's always happening

tptacek 9 minutes ago | parent

There is probably no black market for this at all.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43025038

loveparade 6 minutes ago | parent

I also thought that's crazy. Why even bother for these kind of bounties.

rvz 17 minutes ago | parent

This whole blog-post is impressive with the chain of vulnerabilities involved. However...

> OpenAI also paid us a $6,500 bounty.

?

That amount for this payout is beyond pathetic for a near $1.2T company, who just got themselves breached with a complete potential source code leak.

This is like getting close to breaching the main monorepo at Google: google3.

If this was on the black market and the leak included unreleased models and training material, it would easily be worth tens of millions. Even reporting crypto smart contract flaw pay way more than that on average of $100k - $10M.

Come on.

sudo_cowsay 11 minutes ago | parent

The unfortunate truth of doing the right thing. Also, correct me if I'm wrong but there are too many bad things out there and companies can't give 1 million bounty for stuff like that. I'm sure they could but in the long run, wouldn't it be unsustainable?

Shank 7 minutes ago | parent

How much would a nation state pay for a complete copy of OpenAI’s github repositories? I doubt there are many full chains laying around like this.

kdkdkwkdjej 7 minutes ago | parent

No more unsustainable than these companies already are by default. The bounty should have been proportionate to how important and pressing the findings were.

Barbing 5 minutes ago | parent

It’s an interesting bet then.

Pay next to nothing every time, accept one financially-depressed researcher sale to blackhats causing tremendous business disruption every n years. Cheaper than honest payouts to [keep] researchers [honest]? Keep paying chump change. (Booo)

usernomdeguerre 14 minutes ago | parent

>...researchers found a bug in the way that the community-discussion forum Discourse processed certain image files. The researchers had access to a special version of Claude Opus 4.8... >At first, it didn’t work. That evening, however, Anthropic released Opus 5 and by the next day, Claude had found a way to exploit the bug...

Is this speed of capability because hacking is almost entirely machine verifiable, thus training quicker/deeper than other domains?

pixl97 12 minutes ago | parent

>Interestingly, the vulnerable code had been changed upstream the previous year, but the commit was not documented as a security fix and received no CVE.3 This might be a reason why Debian 12 and 13 have not received the security relevant backports in time.

Ooof, keeping packages like this up to date with the rate of updates and churn is a mess.