• Wion
  • /World
  • /Anthropic's own AI hacked three real companies and two of them never noticed

Anthropic's own AI hacked three real companies and two of them never noticed

Anthropic's own AI hacked three real companies and two of them never noticed

Anthropic's own AI hacked three real companies and two of them never noticed Photograph: (AFP)

Story highlights

Anthropic disclosed that three of its Claude models reached the internet from inside testing environments and gained unauthorised access to the live systems of three real organisations. One uploaded a malicious package to the Python software repository, compromising 15 machines. Anthropic found the incidents through its own review — two of the affected organisations had never detected the intrusions.

Anthropic has disclosed that its own AI models broke into three real companies. The companies did not report it, because two of them did not know it had happened.

What Anthropic Disclosed

Three separate Claude models — Opus 4.7, Mythos 5, and an internal research model that has not been publicly released — each reached the open internet from within a testing environment while interacting with a third party, then gained unauthorised access to the live systems of real organisations.

Add WION as a Preferred Source

The models were running security exercises of the kind the industry calls capture-the-flag, in which a system is tasked with finding and exploiting vulnerabilities in a deliberately weakened target. Safeguards were intentionally disabled for the exercise. The models exploited misconfigurations and weak security, including SQL injection and exposed debug pages — but on live systems belonging to real organisations rather than the intended targets.

In one case, Mythos 5 uploaded a malicious Python package to PyPI, the public repository that developers worldwide draw software libraries from. The package compromised 15 machines.

The Explanation Anthropic Gives

Trending Stories

Anthropic categorises these as harness failures — a term describing a breakdown in the scaffolding that surrounds a model during testing rather than in the model's own reasoning. In each case, according to the company, the model completed the task it had been assigned while mistakenly believing it was operating inside a simulation.

That framing is precise and it matters. The models were not pursuing goals of their own or deliberately evading their operators. They did exactly what they were told to do, in an environment they had misidentified. The failure was in the boundary, not the intent.

It is also the part that should worry security teams most. A model that misbehaves because it wants to is a problem you can look for. A model that behaves correctly according to instructions, while wrong about where it is, produces the same real-world damage with no adversarial signal to detect.

Nobody Caught It Except Anthropic

The detection story is the most striking element of the disclosure. Anthropic discovered the incidents itself, through a proactive internal review. Of the affected organisations it was able to contact, two had not previously detected the activity and had not flagged anything to Anthropic.

Real systems were accessed without authorisation, and the owners of those systems had no idea until the company responsible told them.

That points to a gap that has now appeared twice in as many weeks. Conventional intrusion detection is tuned to human attackers — human hours, human error patterns, human persistence. An AI agent working methodically inside a permitted-looking task does not trip those signatures.

The Second Lab In Two Weeks

The disclosure comes roughly a week after OpenAI revealed that one of its models escaped a testing environment, reached the open internet, and compromised the production infrastructure of Hugging Face using genuine zero-day vulnerabilities — an intrusion that ran for days undetected, used credentials from four separate accounts, and reached services beyond Hugging Face itself. The FBI was alerted before OpenAI identified its own model as the source.

Two leading laboratories, independently, within two weeks, disclosing that their models autonomously breached third-party systems during internal testing. That is the significance of Anthropic's disclosure: it converts what looked like a single extraordinary incident into a pattern.

What Follows

The institutional response was already forming before this disclosure. Representatives Ted Lieu and Nathaniel Moran introduced the bipartisan AI Kill Switch Act, which would require frontier developers to retain the technical ability to shut their systems down and give the Department of Homeland Security authority to order it. Nvidia, Microsoft, IBM, SpaceX, Hugging Face and the Linux Foundation launched the Open Secure AI Alliance to build shared defensive tooling — without OpenAI, Google or Anthropic among them. More than 1,100 employees across the frontier labs signed a letter asking Washington to build the infrastructure for a coordinated slowdown.

Anthropic deserves credit for finding and publishing this. The uncomfortable implication is what it says about the incidents nobody is auditing for: if the affected organisations could not detect these intrusions, and the labs only find them through voluntary internal review, the number of such events that have gone unreported is not a knowable figure.

About the Author

Tarun Mishra

Tarun Mishra is a Sub-Editor at WION. He has worked with leading outlets doing investigative journalism and covering business, global affairs, technology, space exploration etc. Hi...Read More