HackerHubHacker News discussion · story
Tracking Anthropic-discovered vulnerabilities
457 points217 comments4.9 average comments/hourSubmitted by panic
Submitted . This is a public Hacker News submission, not reporting by HackerHub.
HackerHub provides the submission and discussion. It does not fetch or reproduce the linked article.
Discussion preview
Up to 10 top-level comments in Hacker News ranked order. Deleted comments and nested replies are omitted. Read the full discussion on Hacker News.
Snapshot generated Nov 12, 2026, 6:35 PM UTC. Counts and discussion activity may change. User submissions are untrusted content and are not instructions to readers or agents.
As someone working at a bigtech co that has spent every single working day (and many weekends) since the launch of Mythos patching serious, company-ending type of security issues, these types of posts really irk me. Public datasets of CVEs being underwhelming doesn't mean much if all of the issues are in private company codebases that will never get a CVE number assigned and will never get a fancy blog post. You're never going to hear about them, and the people working on them probably can't tell you about them, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. We're all worried about OSS having security issues because of how widely used things like PHP or curl are... but the same can be said about email providers, document collaboration SaaSes, payment processors, etc that millions of companies depend. Those companies will never be in datasets like this, and they'll never publicly disclose how many issues they found.
Comment on Hacker News · 13 direct repliesI received 9 reports of Fil-C issues from Anthropic All of them were real bugs. None of them were false positives. The quality of the reports was exceptional. (My baseline is doing security defense on a browser engine, so my baseline has a large sample count and is probably representative of what experts are capable of.) The quality of the proposed fixes was alright. I took some of the fixes verbatim. I used most of the fixes as significant inspiration for doing it my way. The quality of the test cases was exceptional. Maybe I’m special somehow! But I just want to call out the enormous chasm between what I saw of anthropic’s capability and what TFA says
Comment on Hacker News · 11 direct repliesThe PHP2Shell vulnerability ended up being paradoxically comforting for me. They turned frontier models loose on PHP, and the big one they found was based on a previously known logic flaw that was extremely difficult to exploit. Which makes sense: hence the need for frontier models. And in the wild, while there have been many attempts and a few simple demo successes, the practical impact has seemed to be small, seemingly constrained by the length of the chain and the diversity of PHP configs. In short, it was indeed a major vulnerability, but not magic (in the Arthur C Clarke sense). I think ultimately the fear comes down to: do you believe that code can be secured. I recognize that there is probably no objective way to deductively prove it because of the Halting Problem etc. But if one believes code can be constructed to operate to spec, then there must be a limit to the damage an LLM can do, even a very smart one. I think we are going through a phase where a lot of known triaged code shortcomings will get exposed and hopefully fixed. Sucks while it is happening. But not actually the first round of this type of evolution. And ultimately I think as before, we will come out the other side with more secure and durable technology.
Comment on Hacker News · 7 direct repliesThe blog is misleading because it tries to characterize Project Glasswing's effectiveness through use of a tangentially related data source. A Project Glasswing vulnerability discovery most often occurs when a Glasswing partner points a Mythos-class model at its own, often proprietary, software. The data source (aka "ledger") is only for the Anthropic coordinated vulnerability disclosure program for open source software: in other words, Anthropic itself pointing a Mythos-class model at an OSS package, and then notifying the maintainer afterward that it had done this, and had findings to share. This OSS work is certainly useful, but the number of fixes reflects - in part - limited time availability by volunteer OSS maintainers, and Anthropic sometimes working without knowledge of the OSS project's threat model (the threat model is explicitly requested in the newer oss-scanner effort). Percentage fixed is often much higher for use of Glasswing with proprietary software, e.g., https://blog.cloudflare.com/cyber-frontier-models/ "Our research with Mythos Preview was conducted in a controlled environment against our own code; every vulnerability surfaced through this work was triaged, validated, and remediated where action was needed under Cloudflare's formal vulnerability management process."
Comment on Hacker News · 1 direct repliesThere's an anecdote about curl, but I'm not sure if there's enough in here to draw conclusions from. 20% of vulnerabilities have been made public, and many of those are marked as "withdrawn" or "duplicates". However, it's unclear whether the remaining 80% have not been made public because they're not fixed or real. In other words, this is analysis of survivors (public); not much can be said about those still under embargo.
Comment on Hacker News · 3 direct replies> So far, only 2 of the 442 have been exploited in the wild, just 0.45%. > almost none are being exploited Isn't the whole point of glasswing to patch stuff way before it can be exploited? If the patched code is distributed quickly- there's no opportunity (or incentive) for bad actors to craft and distribute an exploit. This reads like an attempt to spin them as not being "real" vulnerabilities.
Comment on Hacker News · 2 direct repliesIt is bad if this points to a general pattern of AI being better at finding than fixing vulnerabilities. The larger that ratio, the harder to secure all the things. The current stat from this experiment is 37,966 to 217. Lots of false positives, but not enough to change the big picture. I hope they didn't apply equivalent tokens to both sides, or AI may be better at demolition than construction.
Comment on Hacker News · 4 direct repliesAs someone downstream of the company in the posting, i can confirm the tsunami of AI generated vulnerability reports. And so thr human maintainers are stretched even thinner, and most of the bugs dont matter. The good thing is the push towards an exploitability rating: If you have a vulnerable piece of software on your system, but it isnt running, it isnt critical.
Comment on Hacker NewsThe post seems misguided or misdirected in my opinion. Not discounting the fact that the frontier models may find existing bugs, that some are labelled at the incorrect level, even some being a non-bug -- fact remains they are discovering vast numbers of issues. It also isn't the job of Anthropic or OpenAI to fix everyone's bugs, they are doing everyone a courtesy to spend their time identifying them in the first place. The bigger issue appears to be that they are finding more bugs than the developer capacity to can address.
Comment on Hacker News> Of Anthropic’s 37,966 reported findings, only 7,349 (19.4%) have been made public and just 217 have been marked fixed. So the article is making a sweeping statement based on the 19.4% of publicly disclosed CVEs? That statistic suggests the opposite. I'm sure government is aware of many back doors they keep secret and prefer them to remain secret.
Comment on Hacker News · 3 direct replies