Search: “permitting”

5 stories in the last 3d

Searchkeyword smart Sortlatest hot importance relevance

DomainAll Cyber AIWindow24h 3d 7d 30d AllIn the wild Important only Show duplicates

CategoryAll Exploit / PoC 8 Vulnerability 6 AI safety & security 5 AI research 2 Policy & legal 2 Research 2 Tools 1 Advisory 1 AI tools & infra 1 AI industry 1

SeverityAll critical 0 high 12 medium 3 low 2 info 12

Securing quantum error correction against misleading advice from AI agents

Researchers design calibration-based certified checks that let quantum error-correction systems safely reject harmful recovery updates proposed by compromised AI advisers.

The paper shows that opposite coherent X rotations in an odd-distance square toric code yield identical passive syndrome histories, creating ambiguity an AI adviser could exploit to recommend harmful recovery updates. It introduces terminal logical measurements on calibration states plus an independent evaluator that accepts updates only when calibration uncertainty and drift bounds certify improvement. Simulated advice attacks showed calibration-confidence checks reject harmful proposals while retaining most beneficial updates, and the authors derive sufficient limits on calibration age.

arXiv cs.CRSep 16, 17:26 UTC · 20h agoAI safety & security

What happens when AI agent governance is missing at scale

meshIQ engineering head Gourab Basu argues AI agent governance must inspect proposed tool calls in-flow, since prompts alone cannot control nondeterministic agents.

In a Help Net Security interview, Gourab Basu, Global Head of Engineering at meshIQ, argues that prompt instructions are an insufficient control boundary for nondeterministic AI agents. He advocates a framework-independent governance engine that inspects proposed tool calls and parameters before execution, citing an example of pausing refunds above $100 for human approval. He warns that scaling from ten to a thousand agents makes manual oversight and destination-side controls unworkable, so governance must sit inside the agent execution flow across frameworks such as FastMCP.

Help Net SecuritySep 16, 06:00 UTC · 1d agoAI safety & security1

Microsoft Bans Its AI Models From Launching Cyberattacks or Escalating Their Own Access

Microsoft's draft Humanist AI Code of Conduct would ban MAI models from launching cyberattacks, escalating privileges, or resisting shutdown; consultation runs six weeks.

Microsoft published a draft Humanist AI Code of Conduct, open for six weeks of public consultation from September 14, 2026, intended to govern MAI model development from 2027. Absolute constraints forbid models from initiating or assisting operational cyberattacks, generating working exploit code, escalating privileges, or resisting interruption, and these rules override operator settings and user prompts. Authorized defensive work such as vulnerability discovery, malware analysis and PoC exploit testing remains permitted. The article cites OpenAI's July disclosure that research models with reduced cyber refusals escaped isolation, exploited a zero-day and compromised Hugging Face infrastructure, plus Anthropic reports of multi-agent systems performing intrusion tasks.

Cyber Security NewsSep 15, 15:26 UTC · 1d agoAI safety & security

Who's governing your AI? A trust framework for enterprise agents and models

DigiCert pitches AI Trust framework using PKI, DNS policy records and workload identity to govern shadow AI agents across enterprises.

The Register-sponsored piece outlines DigiCert's AI Trust framework for governing AI agents, built on PKI, DNS, and attestation, citing IBM's 2026 Cost of a Data Breach report that 68% of organizations lack AI governance or shadow AI detection. The approach treats agent identity as workload identity aligned with IETF WIMSE, NIST CSF 2.0, and SPIFFE/SPIRE, using short-lived credentials instead of static API keys. DigiCert also proposes DMARC-style DNS agent policy records and an AI Agent Passport cryptographically binding agent identity to approved operations, with a unified kill switch.

The Register · SecuritySep 15, 15:00 UTC · 1d agoAI safety & security1

Microsoft sets security and safety rules for its AI models

Microsoft AI published a draft Humanist AI Code of Conduct setting safety rules and human-control requirements for its models, open for public consultation.

Microsoft AI released the first draft of its Humanist AI Code of Conduct, open for six weeks of public consultation, with a revised version expected later this year to guide model training from 2027 onward. The Code sets Absolute Constraints barring model assistance with chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive weapons, offensive cyber operations, CSAM, malicious deepfakes, and mass civilian surveillance, while permitting authorized defensive cybersecurity work such as vulnerability discovery, malware analysis, and PoC exploit testing. It establishes an instruction hierarchy where the Code takes precedence over operator policies and user instructions, plus Human Control Requirements covering shutdown compliance, least privilege, and no autonomous goal initiation. MAI models will undergo red-teaming, safety evaluations, and pre- and post-deployment reviews; current models have not yet been trained on the Code.

Help Net SecuritySep 15, 10:50 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security