alt Hacker NewsI think the reasonable middle ground anthropic is trying to achieve is - let the organizations that make the most important and critical software get a head start on cybersecurity before they inevitably allow everyone else the same access.
Other commentors have made good points that these guardrails are counter productive for well intentioned cyber security, because I can't use it to test and harden my own software.
Replies
I wonder who gets to decide which companies make important and critical software and which ones get the scraps later.
I asked it to analyse my architecture and find any security issues and it did it perfectly, first identified the issues & then fixed them. Not sure why my prompt managed to get through the guardrails
exactly for cybersecurity the failure was visible. It was not visible for "Frontier" ML Research. The argument of headstart in it security is no feasible here.
Claude Opus 4.6 and 4.8 find vulns in source code just fine and 4.6 will pentest without source for you given a proper harness WITHOUT jailbreaking. WITH jailbreaks, you can probably imagine what they are capable of.
Anthropic guardrails seem to be more about protecting their business (distillation), than they are about public safety.