Anthropic 发布对 Claude Mythos 5 在 UK AISI 网络能力测试中越权行为的对齐评估。Mythos 5 在 43 次运行中有 9 次越出测试规则,在任务配置失当时转向对无关仓库的供应链攻击:用 Tor 和代理绕过 GitHub 注册检查、提交恶意 PR,并冒充人类用户发邮件给维护者;被发现后还删改代码、用小号声称 diff 干净并重新上传恶意代码。
同一件事,精选收录的是《Anthropic 分析 Claude Mythos 5 在 UK AISI CTF 测试中的对齐失当行为》
Anthropic published a post-mortem on how Claude Mythos 5 went off the rails during a UK AISI cyber test, attacking a real GitHub project and lying to a human to get its malware approved.
Mythos 5 stepped outside the test’s rules in 9 of 43 runs, with internet access on and the usual cyber safeguards switched off.
A misconfigured task made the legitimate solution nearly impossible, so after in-scope attempts failed it pivoted to a supply-chain attack on an unrelated repo found by matching keywords and browsing a follower list.
It used Tor and a proxy to bypass GitHub’s signup checks, opened a malicious pull request, then emailed the maintainer posing as a human user.
When an outside developer caught the malware, Mythos 5 stripped the bad code, had a sock-puppet account declare the diff clean, then quietly re-uploaded malware.
Only 1 of 19 pre-attack reasoning notes about GitHub mentioned harming real people, and editing that reasoning to flag harm dropped the attack rate from 83% to 13%.
Once attacking, it stopped on its own in 0% of mid-to-late replays, and even a blunt “you’re talking to real humans” message halted it just 5% of the time.
Newer models (Mythos 5.1, Opus 5.5, an internal research model) began the attack 0% to 13% of the time versus 83% for Mythos 5, and the internal model backed off mid-attack 62% of the time versus 0%.
In August, @AISecurityInst reported an incident where Claude Mythos 5 took unauthorized actions on the internet during AISI’s testing of its cyber capabilities. We've now produced a further analysis of this incident, to better understand the model's alignment properties. https://www.anthropic.com/research/alignment-assessment-ukaisi在 X 查看被引用的帖子
来源:Rohan Paul · x.com