@danielkennedy74@infosec.exchange
Post #1549968
2026-04-22 19:15 UTC
It's interesting listening to people who historically criticized 'FUD', or using fear, uncertainty, or doubt to sell security tooling, uncritically talk about how the damage a Frontier AI model they've never used or seen used will be profound and that it is going to 'change everything'. This is all based on only the analysis of the vendor selling that AI model.
And also you can't see it, because it's 'too dangerous'. Only a carefully curated set of brand name partners who financially benefit from being part of this story can, for 'preparation' (with no details on what that means).
I'm not saying what will or won't happen. But Isn't the brand supposed to be skepticism?
Replies (2)
-
@dpp@mastodon.social 2026-04-22 22:27
@danielkennedy74 @wendynather I am normally with you. In this case, I’m not. https://www.mchange.com/projects/c3p0/#security-note This was one of about a dozen RCEs I found one morning with a simple prompt and about 1,000 tokens against Claude Anything that’s tuned to find these problems is very dangerous. DM me an email address and I’ll send you the results of the prompt
-
@kevinr@masto.free-dissociation.com 2026-04-22 22:35
@danielkennedy74 And it’s a brand with a long history of using fearmongering about cybersecurity as part of its marketing in an industry with a long history of using fearmongering about cybersecurity (and everything else) as a big part of its marketing strategy