• Meron35@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 hours ago

    They have and they’ve explicitly said it’s not solved lmao

    A 1% attack success rate—while a significant improvement—still represents meaningful risk. No browser agent is immune to prompt injection, and we share these findings to demonstrate progress, not to claim the problem is solved

    Mitigating the risk of prompt injections in browser use \ Anthropic - https://www.anthropic.com/research/prompt-injection-defenses

    • BillBurBaggins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I’ve used agents, they tell you everything they’re going to do. And they’re incredibly slow and stupid. I don’t think OPs original premise of it instantly and secretly stealing your bank account details is realistic.

      I don’t think I said prompt injection didn’t exist, just that it didn’t need to be worried about by users in exactly the way that was described

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        40 minutes ago

        and these browsers are specifically not that… these browsers are intended to do things like categorise tabs, complete forms, etc automatically without your interaction

        of course they’ll ask before they do things they consider destructive, but what they consider destructive and what a malicious actor can use are very different things

        some of that is certainly benign, but the point with prompt injection is that it can take benign things and make them plausibly malicious