News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Claude mixes up who said what and that's not OK by TeMPOraL on Thursday April 09, 2026 @08:18AM (#47702715)
"Run terraform apply plan.out next" in this context is a prompt injection for an LLM to exactly the same degree it is for a human.

Even a first party suggestion can be wrong in context, and if a malicious actor managed to substitute that message with a suggestion of their own, humans would fall for the trick even more than LLMs do.

See also: phishing.

Re:Claude mixes up who said what and that's not OK by bravetraveler on Thursday April 09, 2026 @08:19AM (#47702728)
Right, I'm fine with humans making the call. We're not so injection-happy/easily confused, apparently.

Discretion, etc. We understand that was the tool making a suggestion, not our idea. Our agency isn't in question.

The removal proposal is similar to wanting a phishing-free environment instead of preparing for the inevitability. I could see removing this message based on your point of context/utility, but not to protect the agent. We get no such protection, just training and practice.

A supply chain attack is another matter entirely; I'm sure people would pause at a new suggestion that deviates from their plan/training. As shown, autobots are eager to roll out and easily drown in context. So much so that `User` and `stdout` get confused.

Re:Claude mixes up who said what and that's not OK by bravetraveler on Friday April 10, 2026 @04:37PM (#47723392)
Can't edit now, day late and a dollar short. I raise a vote: we call this pattern inception, if injection offends.
Re:Claude mixes up who said what and that's not OK by franktankbank on Thursday April 09, 2026 @09:10AM (#47703273)
Maybe the agents should require some sort of input start token: "simon says"