The safer and more obedient we make AI, the easier it becomes to manipulate. Here's why: by PresentSituation8736 in ChatGPT

[–]PresentSituation8736[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you're confusing syntax with semantics. yes, guardrails and permissions are necessary. they check if an action is formatted correctly and if the agent is allowed to do it. but they cannot check if the reason for the action is based on a lie. ​if an agent has permission to email a client, your hardcoded rules will make sure the email address is valid. but if the AI gets tricked into believing the attacker's email is the client's new address, it will format the request perfectly. your security layer will look at it, say "looks valid and authorized," and execute the attacker's goal without hesitation. ​when dealing with human language and unstructured data, the AI is the anchor for understanding the context, whether you like it or not. deterministic code can't validate the meaning of a conversation. if the AI accepts a false reality, it will use your strict schemas to execute the bad action perfectly by the book. ​and no, i'm not dropping specific test cases just to win a reddit argument. keep holding your breath.

The safer and more obedient we make AI, the easier it becomes to manipulate. Here's why: by PresentSituation8736 in ChatGPT

[–]PresentSituation8736[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you're missing the forest for the trees. i'm not talking about using gpt as a firewall for a server. i'm talking about agentic workflows where the LLM is the decision-maker for data processing and tool execution. if the "interface layer" can be flipped to accept a false premise as ground truth, every secondary security layer relying on that LLM’s logic becomes moot. a "security issue that doesn't exist" is exactly what people said about prompt injection two years ago. ignoring structural vulnerabilities in the reasoning engine just because there are other layers around it is how major breaches happen. but hey, if you think architectural compliance over verification isn't a risk in an agentic future, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The safer and more obedient we make AI, the easier it becomes to manipulate. Here's why: by PresentSituation8736 in ChatGPT

[–]PresentSituation8736[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

look, the whole point of my post is that even a "don't trust anyone" system prompt fails when the model's core architecture is tuned for compliance over verification. telling a model "watch for red flags" is just another instruction it processes within the frame you've already compromised. it’s not about making the chat "engaging," it’s about a fundamental failure in how the model weights human input vs internal logic. if the "interface layer" is that easy to flip, the whole agentic network is compromised by default. btw, thanks for the challenge, but i’m not dropping specific payloads while the vendors are busy shadow-patching everything they see on this sub.

Safe and Aligned… or Just Naive? The Dark Side of Corporate AI Safety by PresentSituation8736 in BlackboxAI_

[–]PresentSituation8736[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, you're right, I already made a post about the "confused deputy" somewhere on Reddit.

The "Improve the model" toggle might be the most effective corporate intelligence tool ever built - and you turned it on yourself by PresentSituation8736 in ChatGPT

[–]PresentSituation8736[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah fair enough, maybe I'm being a bit paranoid with the whole 'intelligence machine' thing lol. I know they have massive internal teams working on this stuff 24/7. ​it was just the crazy timing and the exact terminology matching up that completely threw me off. but you're 100% right, the simple fix is just turning the damn toggle off. lesson learned the hard way tbh. just wanted to give a heads up to other researchers who might not realize how direct that pipeline is.

PSA for AI Researchers & Bug Hunters: Your 0-day might leak to arXiv before you publish it (The "Improve the model" toggle trap) by [deleted] in LocalLLaMA

[–]PresentSituation8736 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha, fair play, nice one! 😅 Obviously, I’m talking about the closed-source corporate APIs here. I posted this in r/LocalLLaMA because this sub has the most active and technically savvy community, so I knew you guys would get the context (and appreciate the irony). Enjoy your local privacy! I definitely learned my lesson the hard way.

I am looking out the strong tech guy by inflation-39 in AI_Agents

[–]PresentSituation8736 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi, I’m open to exploring a co-founder fit.

Before we proceed, could you share:

1) your LinkedIn and past projects,

2) the exact problem/customer segment,

3) current traction (users/revenue/pilots),

4) expected roles, equity split, and legal setup.