Pretty sure Anthropic and other providers prepend these "official" system prompts to your conversation even if you send in a custom system prompt otherwise it would be trivial to produce CSAM, etc.

▲

ardel95 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

CSAM, and other harms, are typically detected using a set of specially trained, faster and cheaper models (and out of band matching techniques) that run before and after the main model.

Any mention in the system prompt is mostly defense in depth, and to make refusals more graceful.

	▲	whstl an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Also, the system prompt, or even something reinforced on every message, is nowhere near as strong as its internal training or as an external safeguard. If the prompt were the only protection, it would be extremely easy to produce illegal content after a long session.

▲

fullmoon 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don’t think so. If you start a new Claude Code session without a system prompt, it doesn’t even know what model it is and hallucinates being some old variant of Sonnet.

	▲	flaburgan an hour ago \| parent [-]
		How do you start a session without a system prompt if you use ACP in Zed for example?

▲

LPisGood 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The system prompt is (and cannot be) the only guardrail against things like that, because any system prompt is little more than a good suggestion.

▲

CodesInChaos 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I wouldn't put auch limitations in the system prompt. A mix of fine-tuning and out-of-band detection appears to be a better fit.

▲

tosh 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

at least according to their documentation they do not

afaiu they have other systems for denying and re-routing requests

▲

DANmode 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They use non-LLM gates for this.

Otherwise DANmode and similar jailbreaks would still be as easily accessible as they were at the beginning.