5 ms·

Codex CLI is FOSS, unlike Claude Code, so Codex is less likely to do things like that, and it's one more reason to avoid Claude Code and Claude in general. Hope

Codex CLI is FOSS, unlike Claude Code, so Codex is less likely to do things like that, and it's one more reason to avoid Claude Code and Claude in general. Hopefully, many eyes will be looking into Codex for malicious things like that.

dannyw 3mo ago
It's released and signed by GitHub I believe (although not deterministic builds), but there's at least a little bit of provenance that you're getting the real repository.
algoth1 3mo ago
But wasnt claude code leaked? Why wasnt this found earlier?
- zeafoamrun 3mo ago
  It doesn't take long for them to vibe code new features for CC
  - nicce 3mo ago
    Or vibe code it completely differently. After all, they have basically unlimited access to best models with maximum speed if they just wanted to.
- bakugo 3mo ago
  This specific form of steganography was not present when the leak happened, as far as I can tell.
loufe 3mo ago
Genuine question though, why would I care about this if I'm paying for a subscription and adhering to TOS. I'm very skeptical about their privacy policy, business practices, and so on, but am curious what the negative about this is. Seems like it would work to my favour as a customer pushing back any date of the cutting of subsidies. That said, these fraudulent proxies are helping Chinese labs keep up, which might be to my advantage long term in eventually having a high quality private AI I fully control on my own hardware. That's not support, but I do recognize the incentive, for whatever that's worth.
- sanderjd 3mo ago
  Because they could use (or maybe are already using) similar techniques to do things you don't approve of, without your awareness.
- yard2010 3mo ago
  What if they decide you're not patriotic enough, serving you evil models, because one man with a lot of shmeckels told them to?
  - fartcoin67 3mo ago
    [dead]
  - s3p 3mo ago
    Then I could just.. cancel my subscription and stop paying?
    - largbae 3mo ago
      Right. They really should wait until _after_ the regulatory capture bit is locked in to mess with users.
    - Laurel1234 3mo ago
      How would you know? They've already degraded model performance silently.
- simonduchastel 3mo ago
  One negative is that Claude Code is pretty buggy, and Anthropic makes frequent changes that cause unexpected regressions [0]. With the harness now doing weird stuff with proxies, I'd be worried of them inadvertently introducing bugs which affect people using the feature legitimately. [0] A recent example: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/april-23-postmortem https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/april-23-postmortem
  - OkWing99 3mo ago
scottyah 3mo ago
"malicious"? Seems like a great way to filter users breaching the TOS while not impeding on normal users. A FOSS client just means they're doing more analysis hidden on their servers.
- Laurel1234 3mo ago
  Anthropic is built on raping TOS and copyright.

dannyw 3mo ago

It's released and signed by GitHub I believe (although not deterministic builds), but there's at least a little bit of provenance that you're getting the real repository.

algoth1 3mo ago

But wasnt claude code leaked? Why wasnt this found earlier?

zeafoamrun 3mo ago
It doesn't take long for them to vibe code new features for CC
- nicce 3mo ago
  Or vibe code it completely differently. After all, they have basically unlimited access to best models with maximum speed if they just wanted to.
bakugo 3mo ago
This specific form of steganography was not present when the leak happened, as far as I can tell.

loufe 3mo ago

Genuine question though, why would I care about this if I'm paying for a subscription and adhering to TOS. I'm very skeptical about their privacy policy, business practices, and so on, but am curious what the negative about this is. Seems like it would work to my favour as a customer pushing back any date of the cutting of subsidies. That said, these fraudulent proxies are helping Chinese labs keep up, which might be to my advantage long term in eventually having a high quality private AI I fully control on my own hardware. That's not support, but I do recognize the incentive, for whatever that's worth.

sanderjd 3mo ago
Because they could use (or maybe are already using) similar techniques to do things you don't approve of, without your awareness.
yard2010 3mo ago
What if they decide you're not patriotic enough, serving you evil models, because one man with a lot of shmeckels told them to?
- fartcoin67 3mo ago
  [dead]
- s3p 3mo ago
  Then I could just.. cancel my subscription and stop paying?
  - largbae 3mo ago
    Right. They really should wait until _after_ the regulatory capture bit is locked in to mess with users.
  - Laurel1234 3mo ago
    How would you know? They've already degraded model performance silently.
simonduchastel 3mo ago
One negative is that Claude Code is pretty buggy, and Anthropic makes frequent changes that cause unexpected regressions [0]. With the harness now doing weird stuff with proxies, I'd be worried of them inadvertently introducing bugs which affect people using the feature legitimately. [0] A recent example: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/april-23-postmortem https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/april-23-postmortem
- OkWing99 3mo ago

scottyah 3mo ago

"malicious"? Seems like a great way to filter users breaching the TOS while not impeding on normal users. A FOSS client just means they're doing more analysis hidden on their servers.

Laurel1234 3mo ago
Anthropic is built on raping TOS and copyright.