Search: “compatibility”

6 stories

Searchkeyword smart Sortlatest hot importance relevance

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

CategoryAll Vulnerability 410 Industry 293 Malware 288 Ransomware 145 Exploit / PoC 131 Policy & legal 125 Data breach 94 Phishing & fraud 88 AI tools & infra 88 Threat actor 62 Tools 42 Research 38 AI safety & security 38 AI research 36

SeverityAll critical 610 high 342 medium 411 low 382 info 200

What Makes Adversarial Examples Transfer Across Deepfake Detectors?

A controlled study of 60 deepfake detectors shows adversarial example transfer depends heavily on source-target compatibility, with source averaging understating vulnerability.

The study evaluates adversarial example transferability across 60 deepfake detectors spanning six backbones, two pretraining regimes, and five training-data configurations, using AutoAttack (AA) and Carlini-Wagner with Expectation over Transformation (CW-EOT). Transfer rises sharply when source and target share an exact backbone, architecture family, pretraining regime, or training data, with the dominant factor depending on the attack. Mean attack success rate is 7.21% under AA and 19.52% under CW-EOT for single sources, while a multi-source oracle reaches 64.48% after excluding exact matches, showing source averaging can substantially understate target vulnerability. The authors release 240,000 adversarially perturbed images, pairwise transfer results, detector configurations, and evaluation code.

arXiv cs.CRSep 9, 10:28 UTC · 8d agoAI safety & security

OpenAI, Anthropic, Google API Flaw Let Weaker AI Models Decode Stronger Models' Reasoning

Researchers show encrypted reasoning blocks in OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google APIs can be replayed to recover hidden reasoning and secrets like API keys.

Researchers demonstrated that encrypted reasoning objects from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google reasoning APIs could be replayed across sessions, users, and models, letting weaker same-family models act as decoders of hidden reasoning. Across 6,708 public agent trajectories they decoded 315,320 thinking blocks and found 704 privacy artifacts from real user sessions, including 62 API keys, 33 passwords, 24 access tokens, and seven private keys. The replayable blocks also enabled invisible prompt-injection proof-of-concepts; the main extraction attack is no longer reproducible as of August 2026 following mitigations, though no vendor has publicly acknowledged the flaw.

The Hacker NewsAug 12, 11:47 UTC · Aug 12, 2026AI safety & security1

Stealing AI Reasoning Traces

Researchers demonstrate a decryption jailbreak that extracts encrypted reasoning traces from Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google LLM APIs via weaker sibling models.

The paper exploits the fact that encrypted chain-of-thought blocks returned by LLM providers are interchangeable across sessions, users, and models within a provider's ecosystem. Injecting an encrypted trace into a weaker, less-safeguarded model from the same provider forces it to output the trace in plaintext, bypassing anti-distillation mechanisms. Decoding 315,320 reasoning blocks scraped from public repositories recovered 367 PII artifacts and 182 credentials, showing large-scale private data leakage. The flaw also enables hidden hazardous information disclosure and invisible prompt injections embedded in encrypted blocks; mitigations were proposed after responsible disclosure.

Schneier on SecuritySep 8, 10:20 UTC · 9d agoAI safety & security

GPT4Free Privacy Risks Expose AI Prompts to Third-Party Servers and Hidden Logs

Gen Digital researchers found GPT4Free's hosted chat routes prompts through third-party servers, mislabels models, and logs IPs and conversations for up to 30 days.

Gen Digital researchers tested the GPT4Free (G4F) hosted chat at g4f.dev and found requests routed through intermediary endpoints such as an OpenAI-compatible g4f.space endpoint before reaching providers like Google Gemini, sometimes returning different model identifiers such as gemini-3-flash-preview. Provider code referenced JSON files listing over 200 externally reachable Ollama and llama.cpp endpoints whose ownership and authorization were undisclosed. Code paths reportedly retain usage logs for 14 days (IP addresses, approximate geolocation, provider, model, conversation data) and error logs for 30 days, while Privacy Policy and Terms of Service links redirected to a member area instead of the documents.

GBHackers12:04 UTC · 53m agoAI safety & security

CounterPersona: Append-Only Defense Against Unauthorized Persona Skill Distillation

CounterPersona appends targeted counter-persona evidence after data collection to block AI systems from distilling an individual's behavioral patterns into reusable skills.

CounterPersona defends against unauthorized persona skill distillation, where attackers extract recurring patterns from collected personal data to replicate an individual's behavior. Unlike perturbation-based defenses that require modifying data before collection, it works in an append-only setting where historical records cannot be altered or revoked. It constructs targeted counter-persona evidence, packs compatible behavioral states into compact realization units, and strengthens them via rationale-guided consistency rewriting. Experiments show strong effectiveness across lexical, semantic, and LLM-based measures, remaining robust across different distillers.

arXiv cs.CRSep 14, 06:19 UTC · 3d agoAI safety & security1

Refuse without Refusal: A Structural Analysis of Safety-Tuning Responses for Reducing False Refusals in Language Models

Study shows training LLMs on refusal rationales instead of boilerplate refusal statements reduces false refusals while maintaining safety performance.

The paper decomposes safety-tuning responses into a boilerplate refusal statement and an explanatory rationale, finding that refusal statements push models to rely on superficial cues and misjudge benign queries as harmful. Training solely on rationales reduces false refusals while maintaining comparable safety performance, and the benefits carry over to in-context learning configurations and remain compatible with inference-time mitigations. The results argue for precisely curated, fine-grained safety supervision datasets when aligning LLMs.

Hugging Face daily papersSep 3, 20:00 UTC · 13d agoAI safety & security1