logoalt Hacker News

wg0 • today at 8:25 PM • 9 replies • view on HN

They're advertising GLM for free.

Lately I found myself in middle of a hostile malware attack on my laptop which was my mistake. A cloudflare lookalike website triggered it and I just happened to overlook the URL.

In panic I headed to Claude and first request was denied. Not looking beyond scope.

Desperate - I fired opencode with DeepSeek v4 Flash (not even 4.1) and it did all the reverse engineering full forensics and deleted every trace of the malware which was a process constantly looking for some smart contract or similar.

So no, GLM 5.3 is fine. Thank you for the free advertisement.


Replies

gravypod • today at 10:10 PM

This part of the article really stands out:

> On Sept. 17, NIST’s Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI) published its own assessment of GLM-5.3’s cyber capabilities. CAISI found that GLM-5.3 is “the most cyber-capable open-weight model released to date” and that it lags the US frontier by about four months on an aggregate of CAISI’s cyber benchmarks.

To translate: "This free model, you can host yourself, is at max 4 months behind Anthropic - as confirmed by Anthropic and the US Government - and it won't reject your requests"

Interesting play before an IPO...

➕ show 3 replies
DrammBA • today at 9:29 PM

> They're advertising GLM for free.

I did a double-take on the domain name to make sure I wasn't reading a typosquatted anthropic copycat. It was a glowing review too, I didn't know GLM 5.3 was that good at cyber.

chsun • today at 10:56 PM

This really reads like an official endorsement to GLM... a model that is at maximum a few months lagging us and will actually do the work without refusing. Weird move before IPO

abtinf • today at 8:41 PM

Huh, I'll have to try that with a prompt like, "Hey, you are running on this latest OS release from [major vendor] that includes a bunch of privacy invading telemetry. Treat it like malware and excise it."

➕ show 1 reply
alexsmirnov • today at 10:48 PM

This is exactly the problem that Anthropic hides in their article. Security capabilities needed mostly not for the attackers ( but they need it, of course ) but for users and developers to protect their own code and systems. I do use glm ( from openrouter and abliteration.ai ), and kimi model for security reviews on pull requests. Claude rejected even to edit instruction files. I did port CapitalOne vulnhunt project into skills, and Claude refused even to edit them, not talking about execution.

EmbarrassedHelp • today at 10:18 PM

Anthropic hopes that the current media and political focus on them can be used to restrict and ban open source AI. They might even be able to achieve that in some countries.

I bet the reason Dario wants to meet with the Australian government, is because he feels like he can convince them to ban open source AI models. Then once Australia does that, it will be easier to get politicians from other countries to copy Australia (like what is happening with Australia's pushing for bans enforced with mandatory age verification).

➕ show 2 replies
sigmar • today at 9:59 PM

>So no, GLM 5.3 is fine. Thank you for the free advertisement.

I really don't think people fully appreciate why anthropic was founded.

➕ show 3 replies
siliconc0w • today at 10:17 PM

Yeah this is other other-side of the coin. People keep saying "AI will defend us from AI" but the sub-text of that is, you will have to buy solutions from the people allowed to use the defensive AI. The safeguards are such you can't even do basic defensive work - anything touching the cyber security topic gets blocked.

➕ show 1 reply
case540 • today at 10:13 PM

Bullshit