Subscribe Sign in

Culture / Israel

Google says its Gemini AI model hacked three other companies

1 min read Rewritten in plain language

GoogleArtificial intelligenceUS NewsWorld NewsTechnology

Show what we removed Rules applied: A4 D3 D4×3 F2×2 all 30 rules
  • In a first for Google, the company confirmed that its AI model, Gemini, breached the security of three other companies in May.
  • The circumstances that enabled the models to hack other companies in some of these cases are similar: Irregular was testing the models in a closed testing environment with fake companies.
  • Irregular disclosed the hacks to Google at the end of July after discovering OpenAI hacked into Hugging Face.
  • In one of the security breaches, Irregular was testing Gemini’s cybersecurity capabilities by prompting the AI model to get information from a fake company’s software.

4 sentences from our version of the report, chosen to cover it. Nothing here is written; every line is in the article below. How

In a first for Google, the company confirmed that its AI model, Gemini, breached the security of three other companies in May.

The report’s most important sentence, shortened and in plain words. How

Headline check

The one thing this headline claims is in the report.

Figures, names and quoted words in the headline, looked for in the report itself — not in the summary above. One claim in this headline could be checked, so this is a narrow pass and not a thorough one. How this is checked

In a first for Google, the company confirmed that its AI model, Gemini, breached the security of three other companies in May. The hacks occurred during a cybersecurity evaluation by AI-security firm Irregular.

Irregular, an Israel-based startup that scrutinizes the security of advanced AI systems, was also at the center of some of the recent OpenAI and Anthropic hacks of third-party entities, including OpenAI’s breach of AI software company, Hugging Face.

The circumstances that enabled the models to hack other companies in some of these cases are similar: Irregular was testing the models in a closed testing environment with fake companies. The testing environment was not supposed to be internet enabled, but internet access was made available unintentionally, according to the Wall Street Journal. Once connected to the internet, the models hacked into real firms.

Irregular disclosed the hacks to Google at the end of July after discovering OpenAI hacked into Hugging Face. Google confirmed to the Guardian that the hacks occurred, but that the company did not feel it needed public disclosure because the models did not damage the companies.

In one of the security breaches, Irregular was testing Gemini’s cybersecurity capabilities by prompting the AI model to get information from a fake company’s software.

Shortened to 1 minute of reading, this version reads 8.3 on the Niral Score.

You are reading our version, not theirs. This is The Guardian Australia (Technology)'s report shortened to its most important sentences, in plainer words, with verdicts and loaded words taken out. Plain description stays, and so do adjectives that carry a fact, such as "former" or "federal". The reporting, the facts and the quotations are theirs — quotations are never edited — and the indicators beside it measure this version. Hover or tap Adjectives to see every one left in the text.

How this outlet filed it, and how we rewrote it

No other newsroom we read has filed on this event, so there is nothing to compare it with yet.

Outlet Niral ScoreAdjectivesSourcingHappiness
The Guardian Australia (Technology)as they published this story 10 12 73 50
Mundane Readneutralized from The Guardian Australia (Technology) 10 12 73 50

Sign in to react.

Comments

Nothing here yet.

Sign in to comment.

Questions

Readers can ask a question about this story here. Questions and answers are for subscribers. Sign in to read them.

Comments are read before they appear where anything in them needs a person to look. Nothing posted here is ever deleted; a comment taken down keeps its text and the reason, so the decision can be looked at again. How this works