Early rogue AI agent activity and attempts to hack found on urlquery.net

alex-moon•29 minutes ago

It's said on every one of these but it bears repeating: existing cybercrime legislation already covers this - "rogue agent AI associated with OpenAI attempted to hack xyz" = OpenAI attempted to hack xyz.

colinhb•11 minutes ago

I want to agree but have heard from several lawyers that at least in US, CFAA[1] in unlikely to be sufficient because it requires intent. No person intended to gain unauthorised access.

Now I think the correct response is both trying in court to stretch CFAA and state statutes to cover, which will be highly fact specific, and update the law.

But in either case won’t be a slam dunk.

PSA to folks in the thread: If you’re American call or write to your state and Federal reps about this, and if not investigate whether there are gaps in your country’s laws.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act

throwaway27448•less than a minute ago

Building software capable of this seems equivalent to trying to produce this behavior. I don't see why this can't qualify for intent.

podocarp•3 minutes ago

Wait so if I was making a bomb but you couldn't prove I wanted to blow someone up or had some motive (e.g. I'm just a chemistry enthusiast, plenty of those YouTube channels around) so it just becomes an "accident"?

So as long as there's no motive behind it then it's just OK?

setopt•20 minutes ago

Shouldn’t the difference be like manslaughter vs murder, in that intent matters? Accidental hacking on this scale is a somewhat new problem, no?

Zarathustra30•7 minutes ago

I'd say this would be Depraved Heart Hacking. Technically, OpenAi didn't intend for their agent to hack anyone, but it's the obvious consequence of what they are doing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depraved-heart_murder

bakugo•13 minutes ago

Intent matters, and this is intentional. They didn't accidentally deploy these AI agents, and they didn't accidentally give them the tools required to send arbitrary requests to third party websites.

If you walk out onto a busy street, pull out a gun, close your eyes and start randomly shooting around you until you hit someone, you don't get to go "whoops, didn't mean to" afterwards, it's still murder.

benob•3 minutes ago

Couldn't find the reference but I remember some time ago a first generation automated gun killing the audience at an army show. Was the gun maker convicted of manslauther?

soundworlds•22 minutes ago

Take out the word "AI", and this is simply and organization's (OpenAI's) products causing real damage to all of these platforms around the world.

You want AI labs to pace? Simply hold them liable for their products.

skew-aberration•26 minutes ago

Since the publicized AI agent hacks typically aren't malicious, maybe it's time to start plastering all public facing web infrastructure with polite requests to stop hacking. Nothing to stop three letter agencies though.

orlp•6 minutes ago

How do you define malicious?

throwaway27448•3 minutes ago

Words matter. "Rogue" is extremely disingenuous. Someone, somewhere, is paying for this behavior. Either the software is broken or the operator is malicious. It is heinously irresponsible behavior to feed an already-boiling psychotic hysteria.

yewenjie•27 minutes ago

OpenAI agents these summer are like a gift that keeps giving, for the existential risk communicators.

lapkaaaa•42 minutes ago

blackwall when? XD

Early rogue AI agent activity and attempts to hack found on urlquery.net

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion (13 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews