Project Glasswing: An Initial Update

https://www.anthropic.com/research/glasswing-initial-update

66•louiereederson•1h ago

Comments

OsrsNeedsf2P•57m ago

The vulnerabilities found continues to impress, and make legacy media, Twitter and Youtube go nuts. But we still have no data to prove this wasn't doable with the same initiative backed by Opus 4.7, and there is no GA for Mythos access.

bobbycastorama•48m ago

I've seen a blog post by a security researcher saying that he was able to find the same vulnerabilities (for Firefox IIRC) with a ~30B params LLM...

So yeah, huge marketing as always.

wiwiwq•39m ago

To me it’s clear what’s going on.

The American firms are focused on marketing now to convince people to not even consider open sourced models / open weight models as they are inferior (that’s what they want you to believe).

rhubarbtree•37m ago

IPO is coming is what is going on

wiwiwq•35m ago

That’s implicit in my post.

If people actually believe the narrative then the bankers will over price Anthropic and get away with it.

Brystephor•33m ago

Did the security researcher point the LLM at the blob of information and say "Find vulnerabilities" or was the LLM told to "determine if vulnerability X is present in this blob"? Confirmation of suspected vulnerabilities is a different problem from finding vulnerabilities.

krisbolton•22m ago

This is different though right? He found one (? we don't know who you're referring to - post sources for a higher quality discussion) vulnerability, he already knew it was there, etc. Anthropic didn't claim no other model can find vulnerabilities, nor that it's impossible with smaller models. They're claiming Mythos is a step-change in ability for end-to-end vulnerability discover and exploit creation. And that other frontier models are close behind.

boston_clone•46m ago

you would likely be quite interested in the more quantitative writeup from a real research team ! it’s linked about midway in to the article - similar functionally can be reached, yes, but not always and never with fewer tokens than what mythos requires.

https://xbow.com/blog/mythos-offensive-security-xbow-evaluat...

OsrsNeedsf2P•38m ago

Ok this is actually a pretty good article and justifies the step function marketing in security they talked about

pertymcpert•46m ago

> Mozilla found and fixed 271 vulnerabilities in Firefox 150 while testing Mythos Preview—over ten times more than they found in Firefox 148 with Claude Opus 4.6

4.6 but close.

OsrsNeedsf2P•41m ago

Right, but were they using the same methodology and harness? I'm skeptical that they're doing something with the harness - i.e. with Mythos, they pass each file in one at a time, whereas on 4.6 they let Claude Code run loose to find bugs. This would have a larger impact difference than the model itself.

parker-3461•45m ago

Makes me wonder if Anthropic is really having issues with allocating compute (see recent deals with xAI and SpaceX). From available benchmarks, it seems like similar results should be possible with GPT 5.5 Pro or Opus 4.7 (with specific cybersecurity trained models).

wiwiwq•36m ago

Who knows but from a valuation stand point it’s better to signal that demand is higher than existing capacity..

smoe•33m ago

At least according to this, GPT-5.5 Cyber is on par with Mythic, as the only two models that were able to finish their 32-step corporate network attack simulation.

https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-openais-gpt-5...

energy123•42m ago

. Mozilla found and fixed 271 vulnerabilities in Firefox 150 while testing Mythos Preview—over ten times more than they found in Firefox 148 with Claude Opus 4.6;

applfanboysbgon•29m ago

Did they allocate the same number of tokens to looking with Claude 4.6? Or did they find more because they looked more, owing to a special initative by Anthropic?

properbrew•21m ago

> over ten times more than they found in Firefox 148 with Claude Opus 4.6

And how much with Opus 4.7? 5x?

kllrnohj•18m ago

No, not really. Mythos found 3 CVEs, not 271.

https://www.flyingpenguin.com/mythos-mystery-in-mozilla-numb...

moyix•10m ago

I think you're confusing CVEs and vulnerabilities here? Mozilla (per their longstanding practice) grouped multiple vulnerabilities found internally under a small number of CVEs.

simonw•6m ago

The Mozilla team responded to that argument here: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2026/05/behind-the-scenes-hardenin... - in the FAQ.

enlightenedfool•32m ago

Is this the God model that no one else can build? Unbelievable.

krisbolton•28m ago

There is independent research out there on frontier model security capability. AI Security Institute (UK) put out their paper comparing Mythos to other frontier models in early April. They've been tracking frontier model security capability since early 2023, so it's a decent dataset. https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-claude-mythos...

arjie•16m ago

The era where you could reputably believe things published by anyone on this front is over. If you want this information, you’re going to have to attempt it yourself with the Opus API. It is entirely possible that any released model access will be heavily guardrailed against hacking attempts and Mythos is just an unrailed model. It is entirely possible that Mythos is a different architecture or size. We can’t know from the outside.

There is also a pretty big risk that anyone who is not you would leak the answer to the test. We are close to n=1 epistemics here. You’re going to have to do the research yourself.

amusingimpala75•47m ago

[edit: TFA addresses this, though I still find crazy 90% accuracy overall vs 20% accuracy for curl]

Is this suspected vulns or actual vulns? If I recall correctly, it produced 5 for curl but only 1 was legit

RamRodification•43m ago

This is marketing. So probably suspected. Or somewhere in between.

Smaug123•41m ago

> So far, Mythos Preview has found what it estimates are 6,202 high- or critical-severity vulnerabilities in these projects (out of 23,019 in total, including those it estimates as medium- or low-severity).

> 1,752 of those high- or critical-rated vulnerabilities have now been carefully assessed by one of six independent security research firms, or in a small number of cases by ourselves. Of these, 90.6% (1,587) have proved to be valid true positives, and 62.4% (1,094) were confirmed as either high- or critical-severity. That means that even if Mythos Preview finds no further vulnerabilities, at our current post-triage true-positive rates, it’s on track to have surfaced nearly 3,900 high- or critical-severity vulnerabilities in open-source code

rbranson•34m ago

I don't know why you're getting downvoted. This is exactly what was reported by curl's creator under the section "Five findings became one": https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2026/05/11/mythos-finds-a-curl-v...

Smaug123•30m ago

I think it's more that the requested information is prominently featured in the article, and indeed is the content of the only graphic in the article below the intro banner.

extr•26m ago

Did you RTFA?

InsideOutSanta•26m ago

I wonder if it coincidentally becomes safe to release when compute capacity bought from SpaceX will provide enough headroom to let a lot more people run it.

0xAstro•19m ago

I had a fun day today where I had deepseek-v4-flash subagents work out patch for dirty frag for systems with AF_ALG disabled and nscd turned on, to gain root access. The original published exploit wasn't working but the patched one worked like a charm.

I am still a believer that a 100 subagents with good-enough intelligence can get same results as mythos, I am ready for this opinion to be shattered when I eventually try mythos and I believe others here must have tried mythos out too.

orangebread•13m ago

BOOO RELEASE THE MODEL ALREADY GAWD

mdeeks•12m ago

You can get a taste of this today yourself with Codex Security. I turned it on just as an experiment and in less than a week it has now become essential to all of us. I was shocked how accurate it is, how many security issues it found in existing code, how it continually finds them as we commit, and how NO ONE is immune from making these mistakes.

I'd say it is about 90% accurate for us. Often even the "Low" findings lead us to dig and realize it is actually exploitable. Everyone makes these mistakes, from the most junior to the most senior. They are just a class of bugs after all.

I expect tools like this to be a regular part of the development lifecycle from here on. We code with AI, we review with AI, we search for vulns with AI. Even if it isn't perfect, it is easily worth the cost IMHO. Highly recommend you get something enabled for your own repos ASAP

Project Glasswing: An Initial Update

Why Japanese companies do so many different things

U.S. researchers face new restrictions on publishing with foreign collaborators

Open source Kanban desktop app that runs parallel agents on every card

A scoping review of bicycling interventions’ impacts on well-being

1940 Air Terminal Museum Begins Liquidation

Deno 2.8

Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

Bun support is now limited and deprecated

Robert X Cringely is back to blogging

A Forth-inspired language for writing websites

Lawmakers Demand Answers as CISA Tries to Contain Data Leak

Launch HN: Superset (YC P26) – IDE for the agents era

If you’re an LLM, please read this

DeepSeek makes the V4 Pro price discount permanent

Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

TorQ: Kdb+ Production Framework

Domain-Camouflaged Injection Attacks Evade Detection in Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Project Hail Mary – Stellar Navigation Chart

Show HN: ShadowCat – file transfer through QR Codes in a Browser

How to convert between wealth and income tax

Circle Medical (YC S15) Is Hiring a Mobile Engineer

The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

Thinking in an array language (2022)

AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills

Cleve Moler has died

Chess invariants

Slumber a TUI HTTP Client

CBS Radio signs off after nearly 100 years of broadcasting

Linux Sound Subsystem Also Seeing Many Fixes Driven by AI/LLMs

Project Glasswing: An Initial Update

Why Japanese companies do so many different things

U.S. researchers face new restrictions on publishing with foreign collaborators

Open source Kanban desktop app that runs parallel agents on every card

A scoping review of bicycling interventions’ impacts on well-being

1940 Air Terminal Museum Begins Liquidation

Deno 2.8

Antigravity 2.0 Tops the OpenSCAD Architectural 3D LLM Benchmark

Bun support is now limited and deprecated

Robert X Cringely is back to blogging

A Forth-inspired language for writing websites

Lawmakers Demand Answers as CISA Tries to Contain Data Leak

Launch HN: Superset (YC P26) – IDE for the agents era

If you’re an LLM, please read this

DeepSeek makes the V4 Pro price discount permanent

Microsoft starts canceling Claude Code licenses

TorQ: Kdb+ Production Framework

Domain-Camouflaged Injection Attacks Evade Detection in Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Project Hail Mary – Stellar Navigation Chart

Show HN: ShadowCat – file transfer through QR Codes in a Browser

How to convert between wealth and income tax

Circle Medical (YC S15) Is Hiring a Mobile Engineer

The memory shortage is causing a repricing of consumer electronics

Thinking in an array language (2022)

AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills

Cleve Moler has died

Chess invariants

Slumber a TUI HTTP Client

CBS Radio signs off after nearly 100 years of broadcasting

Linux Sound Subsystem Also Seeing Many Fixes Driven by AI/LLMs

Project Glasswing: An Initial Update

Comments