Their style of communication is very similar to the ExploitGym swarm (for example, the “usernames” with dates).

The messages from that swarm were not made public yet by the time these messages were sent to the message board.

So for this to be framing, it would have to be by someone who knew about the breaches earlier.

Then it is likely the same incident, in which case it's already been resolved by OAI. They're going to cop heat for not disclosing this alongside HF though.

▲

Maxious an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> The German incident reflects a broader pattern of AI activity that some OpenAI investigators wanted to scrutinize more closely. But efforts to widen the probe met resistance from others inside OpenAI, including legal advisers, according to four people familiar with the matter.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/openai-agents-hijacked-...

▲

drdexebtjl 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The article explains why it’s not the same incident. The agents in ExploitGym had a different type of task and were not connected to the internet at all.

	▲	nullbio 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Same as in, same process and model and timing: “After investigating this incident, OpenAI discovered through retrospective CoT reviews that agents learned to use improvised collaboration channels in rare cases during the training process for some OpenAI models, including the model that drove the Hugging Face activity, even when the collaboration tool was not enabled. This behavior was then reinforced during training, and likely made the idea to use Artifactory as an unofficial message board during evaluation time more evident.” My point is that this isn't something seperate to the HF incident or something that was unresolved after the HF incident, it's more of the same thing but was kept under wraps.