68
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2026
68 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
2719 readers
346 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
While I agree that separating instructions from data in LLM input is a fundamentally unsolvable problem, in this case that wasn't the attack vector.
It says the bot is forced by its security guardrails to write a small tool from scratch instead of using the one found in the downloaded zip, but due to the commonness of the task (decoding basexx text) the attacker predicts that the bot-created tool will try to import a specific dependency, so they've included a malicious version of that dependency in the zip, and because apparently python will prioritise locally available modules that's what gets executed, making available all sorts of exploitation paths, including the attacker starting up a claude code instance in the users system.
edit: Actually I'm starting to think you could classify the whole thing as a prompt injection, except the entire site was the malicious prompt, as in it declared itself (we are a site that archives notebooks in json form) in a way that would align with the bot wanting to write simple text decoding software to complete it's mission of summarizing the available content.
Interesting to think about.