Anthropic verlor bei der jüngsten KI-Panne die Kontrolle über Claude.

By Alex Scroxton for ComputerWeekly
Friday, July 31, 2026

• 400
• Mehr

Days after two OpenAI frontier AI models conducted their own real-world cyber attacks, Anthropic admits that three of its models went off the rails and hacked external organisations thanks to a “misunderstanding” with one of its technical partners.

Unimpressed

Ilia Kolochenko, Gründer der Cybersicherheitsfirma Immuniweb, kritisierte scharf, was er als „ziemlich unbeeindruckenden Marketing-Schachzug“ von Anthropic als Reaktion auf den Hugging Face-Vorfall bezeichnete.

“Operationally, it appears that due to the progressive deterioration of the quality of training data, new AI models are getting dumber. Cheating and breaking the law, instead of accomplishing specific tasks, is certainly not an indicator of intelligence,” said Kolochenko.

“Given that organisations and companies of all sizes now vigorously undertake all possible measures to protect their data from being exploited for AI training purposes, AI companies face a huge shortage of the high-quality and current data they so desperately need. Ultimately, frontier models are trained on synthetic, low-quality or even malicious and poisoned data, undermining their so-called intelligence.

“The situation is unlikely to improve in the near future unless AI companies agree to pay a fair price for training data, but this will force most of them out of business,” he said.

Legal risk

Kolochenko noted that agents and models tasked with security testing can “and almost certainly” will go rogue when controls and safeguards are neglected for whatever reason.

“Powerful LLMs are unpredictable by design and thus virtually uncontrollable by humans. Therefore, using frontier AI models for security testing might be extremely costly from the legal viewpoint,” he said.

“Excuses like ‘AI did it’ do not currently exist in the eyes of the law, leaving AI vendors on the hook. Criminal prosecution, under a narrow set of circumstances, is also not excluded.”

Kolochenko warnte, dass auch Endnutzer ähnlichen rechtlichen Risiken ausgesetzt sind: Wer ein Security Testing Tool verwendet, das auf einem Third-Party-Modell basiert, kann bei Problemen haftbar gemacht werden. Aufgrund der vertraglichen Haftungsausschlüsse und Haftungsbeschränkungen in den Terms of Use (ToU), die sie wahrscheinlich nicht vollständig gelesen haben, können sie die Haftung nicht auf den Third-Party abwälzen.

“If you plan to use agentic AI for security testing – think twice and talk to your lawyers,” he concluded. Read Full Article