logoalt Hacker News

markasoftware • last Saturday at 9:22 PM • 6 replies • view on HN

Auto mode cannot be considered safer than anything because it does not even attempt to guarantee any sort of security. The threat model is not even defined. It cannot be quantified or compared with any other approach other than "full access"


Replies

Kim_Bruning • last Sunday at 12:55 AM

Compare approving every step manually: at first you read everything the llm proposes carefully, convinced that you'll catch it out. After a while you get faster and faster until at some point you find yourself hitting "approve" the second the text appears, long before you actually could absorb what it said.

This is called "approval fatigue".

If you think this can't possibly happen to you, you might be in for a surprise. This is an almost textbook case of classic conditioning. You'll find yourself hitting that button faster and faster even while fighting back the urge. So a human is no guaranteed backstop.

This is the scenario that cc auto mode guards against. It cuts down the number of permission prompts to something manageable, so that your fingers don't get trained into clicking 'approve' on 'rm -rf' in the very eyeblink that it appears.

So maybe you feel it doesn't work in theory; but weirdly enough, in practice this particular approach is actually one of the better ones; especially when used in combination with other common sense measures where practical.

➕ show 7 replies
bcherny • last Saturday at 9:29 PM

Auto mode is significantly safer than manual approval in practice. Details about the engineering approach and how we tested whether it is safer here: https://claude.com/resources/articles/auto-mode-default-in-c....

➕ show 10 replies
rectang • last Sunday at 1:36 AM

Claude routinely tries to install software if I don't stop it. I try to only use Claude within a container. Outside the container, I never use "auto" mode.

Ideally I would never use Claude at all outside a disposable container, even on a box with no sensitive information and with the sandbox enabled. It's like having an attacker breach your system — you don't know what it did.

RossBencina • last Sunday at 5:25 AM

Yes, furthermore in practice auto mode does not appear to provide anything approaching deterministic gating:

"Measuring the Permission Gate: A Stress-Test Evaluation of Claude Code's Auto Mode" https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.04978

(Shared by hkalbert71 the other day in: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50387838)

fg137 • last Sunday at 1:03 PM

I recently saw that someone's entire project got wiped out because of (incorrect) auto mode approval. And this is because auto mode failed to catch an error in tool use, nothing to do with prompt injection.

Meanwhile I have seen it rejecting perfectly safe commands.

It is a worse version of YOLO mode.

wyager • last Saturday at 11:03 PM

"My personal security model can't represent this, therefore it's not secure"