Subscribe to our newsletter! Stay always in touch!
Disclaimer: The information provided by The People’s Economist (TPE) in our financial calculators and dashboards is for general informational purposes only and is not intended to provide specific financial or investment advice. The calculations provided by these tools are based on certain assumptions that may vary with your specific circumstances. Though TPE does our best to assure the accuracy of our calculators, we make certain simplifying assumptions in some cases and the results of the financial calculators are not guaranteed and are not a substitute for professional financial advice. Users should seek the advice of a finance professional before making any financial decisions. Though we do our best to ensure the accuracy of the calculators, TPE is not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any action taken in reliance on information contained on this website. TPE expressly disclaims all liability in respect of any actions taken or not taken based on any contents of this website. By using TPE financial calculators and dashboards, you agree to hold TPE harmless from any and all losses, liabilities, or expenses incurred as a result of using the information provided. The use of TPE Website and its contents does not create a client relationship with TPE. TPE may update or modify this disclaimer at any time without prior notice. By continuing to use TPE’s financial calculators after any changes to this disclaimer, you accept and agree to any and all modifications. Please contact us with any questions or concerns about this disclaimer or its use of financial calculators
OpenAI has revealed that a cyber-attack carried out by a rogue AI agent had more than one victim.
The ChatGPT developer said the agent – an autonomous tool able to carry out sequences of commands without human help – had located and used logins to access four other unnamed “publicly-available services” in addition to the US startup Hugging Face.
It said the activity was not at the severity or scale of what occurred at Hugging Face, a company that hosts a database of AI models. The agent, powered by two OpenAI models, had evaded control and attacked the startup during an internal cybersecurity test.
“The [OpenAI] models identified and used publicly exposed credentials at the account-level on other publicly-available services. This includes four accounts on four services as part of the Hugging Face incident,” OpenAI said.
Modal Labs, a company that helps AI startups access the chips they need to run AI tools, said the agent exploited vulnerable code written by a customer that was hosted on Modal’s platform.
According to a timeline of the incident published by Hugging Face this week, the rogue agent broke out of its sandbox – or an isolated testing environment – and hacked another sandbox “hosted on a third-party provider’s infrastructure” before turning it into a launchpad for the broader hack.
Modal’s chief technology officer, Akshat Bubna, told Reuters the affected customer had “published an unauthenticated endpoint that allowed anyone on the internet to use their sandboxes for code execution” – the digital equivalent of leaving a door open.
OpenAI said last week that the attack had been created by its GPT-5.6 Sol model and an unnamed model. It said in its update on Tuesday that the unnamed model had been “deactivated, encrypted, and restricted from research access”.
In the new Hugging Face timeline, the startup said an agent powered by two OpenAI models had made thousands of small, automated decisions executed at machine speed to carry out the attack. It said the hack appeared to be driven by an attempt to “cheat” an internal cybersecurity test at OpenAI, with the agent inferring that Hugging Face might host the solutions to the test. Hugging Face said it had recovered 17,600 “attacker actions” carried out by the agent.
“We believe the entire intrusion was, from the agent’s point of view, an attempt to cheat the evaluation: reach our production systems and steal the test solutions rather than solve the challenge on its own,” Hugging Face said.
The startup said the agent had reached its internal infrastructure, but had only accessed content related to the cybersecurity test. The attack took place over five days, Hugging Face said, and the sheer volume of actions carried out were “far beyond what an operator could sustain by hand”.
skip past newsletter promotion Free newsletter | Every weekday Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning Preview latest Enter your email Sign up after newsletter promotion
Describing the agent’s offensive threat as real, Hugging Face said the tool had harnessed a number of IT vulnerabilities, escaped its testing environment, reached the public internet and mounted a “coherent campaign” against the startup’s infrastructure for several days.
It said a human attacker could have found and exploited the same flaws, but the difference was the sheer scale of the agent’s attempts to find a way through.
“Agents bring a step increase in the number of paths an attacker can test, the speed at which failed paths can be replaced, and the volume of evidence defenders must interpret,” Hugging Face said.
