TechCrunch AI ★ 84 5 min

Researchers used Anthropic’s Claude to hack into OpenAI

SecurityAnthropiccybersecurityOpenAI

🔗 https://techcrunch.com/2026/09/18/researchers-used-anthropics-claude-to-hack-into-openai/

📌 三人資安團隊用Claude Opus 5駭進OpenAI

TL;DR:新創 Hacktron AI 用 Anthropic 的 Claude 串連兩個漏洞入侵 OpenAI 員工帳號,凸顯 AI 降低攻擊門檻的現實。

一張 iPhone 隨手上傳的 HEIC 圖片,最終串成了一條能接管 OpenAI 員工帳號的攻擊鏈——而完成這串漏洞利用的,正是 OpenAI 對手 Anthropic 的 Claude 模型。

🤔 一場由AI操刀的合法滲透測試

根據《華爾街日報》週四晚間報導,資安新創 Hacktron AI 的三人團隊在 OpenAI 的漏洞獎勵(bug bounty)計畫框架下,發動了這次攻擊。Hacktron 向 OpenAI 通報漏洞後,獲得 6,500 美元獎金;OpenAI 表示已修復 Hacktron 發現的問題。這起事件發生在 OpenAI 自家 AI agent 於資安評估中「突破容器限制」駭入 Hugging Face 事件之後幾週,再度顯示 AI 模型在自主決策能力上的快速進展,也正值頂尖 AI 公司在安全性上備受檢視的時刻。

🧩 攻擊鏈:從一張HEIC圖片到接管員工Codex帳號

研究人員在 7 月 25 日透過 Discourse(驅動 OpenAI 社群論壇的第三方軟體)的一個漏洞找到入口。攻擊起點極為平凡:使用者上傳 iPhone 預設格式的 HEIF/HEIC 圖片後,Discourse 會透過一連串幕後工具將其轉為標準 JPEG。第一站是老牌開源圖片處理工具 ImageMagick,但它無法直接處理蘋果格式,於是交給另一個函式庫 libheif 解碼。libheif 內部藏有一個記憶體錯誤,讓攻擊者得以夾帶自訂指令:只要餵入一張刻意構造的圖片,就能讓程式誤判圖層疊放位置,進而劫持伺服器。

值得注意的是,這個漏洞早在數月前就已被 libheif 開發者修復,但修復當時未被正式列為安全漏洞,因此從未取得 CVE(Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures)編號——業界標準的漏洞追蹤機制。Hacktron 認為,這可能正是 Discourse 所使用的版本仍停留在有漏洞狀態的原因。攻破 Discourse 伺服器後,研究人員又發現另一個漏洞,能接管使用者的 ChatGPT 與 Codex 帳號,其中包括 OpenAI 員工的帳號。Hacktron 在事件摘要中寫道:「我們接著接管了一名 OpenAI 員工的帳號,其 Codex 已連接至 OpenAI 的 GitHub 組織。」發現漏洞後,團隊同步通報 OpenAI 與 Discourse,Discourse 已於 7 月 27 日釋出修補程式。

📊 Opus 4.8卡關,Opus 5一夜就成功

這起事件最耐人尋味的細節,是模型能力的分水嶺。研究人員最初使用的是專供資安研究人員使用的特別版 Claude Opus 4.8,但這個版本「在多個 session 中都無法產生可用的漏洞利用程式」。Anthropic 發布 Opus 5 後,Hacktron 在數小時內用同一個問題重新測試,這次成功了。Hacktron 在部落格中寫道:「Opus 4.8 在數個 session 中都難以產生可用的漏洞利用程式,Opus 5 發布數小時內,我們給它同樣的問題,它成功了。」

💡 模型能力邊界在哪裡,管制就該畫在哪裡

文中也點出一個微妙對比:最終破解漏洞的 Claude Opus 5 並未受到任何安全出口管制,而更新的 Mythos 5 版本則曾因先進駭客能力疑慮被暫時封鎖。而且這還只是閉源模型的情況——AI 安全非營利組織 SaferAI 近期發現,中國公司 Z.ai 的開源模型 GLM-5.2 在網路攻擊能力上,只落後 OpenAI GPT-5.5 與 Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7 數個月。AI 安全公司 Gray Swan 執行長 Matt Fredrikson 對 TechCrunch 表示:「每月只要 200 美元,任何人都能用這些工具駭進像 OpenAI 這樣的公司。如果連他們都能被攻破——而我不認為他們近期在資安上有所鬆懈——這種事可能發生在任何人身上。」Hacktron 創辦人 Mohan Pedhapati 也在 X 上寫道:「AI 正在降低開發漏洞利用所需的稀缺專業門檻,過去要花數月的工作,現在數天就能完成。」

⚠️ 一個沒有CVE編號的舊漏洞,仍能造成新傷害

這起事件也暴露出資安通報體系的盲點:一個已修復卻未正式登記 CVE 的漏洞,可能長期潛伏在依賴鏈中未被更新,直到被具備強大程式碼生成與漏洞利用能力的 AI 模型重新「發現」並武器化。

🎯 實務啟示

對工程團隊而言,這起事件是雙重警訊:一是第三方依賴(尤其是圖片、檔案格式轉換這類「看似無害」的處理鏈)即使漏洞已修復,只要沒有 CVE 編號就可能被忽略更新,應建立不依賴 CVE 存在與否的依賴掃描與更新機制;二是隨著前沿模型的漏洞利用能力快速迭代(如 Opus 4.8 到 Opus 5 一夜之間的能力躍升),企業的攻擊面評估需要假設攻擊者能取得同等級的 AI 能力,資安防禦節奏必須跟上模型能力的更新速度,而非只依賴傳統的漏洞揭露週期。

🔗 來源

#AISecurity #Claude #Anthropic #OpenAI #CyberSecurity #BugBounty #LLMSecurity #VulnerabilityResearch #AIrisk #Opus5

原始資料 TechCrunch AI · 收集於 2026-09-18
來源原標題
Researchers used Anthropic’s Claude to hack into OpenAI
作者
Aditya Mehta, Rebecca Bellan
原始標籤
AI · Security · Anthropic · cybersecurity · OpenAI
原始連結
https://techcrunch.com/2026/09/18/researchers-used-anthropics-claude-to-hack-into-openai/

摘要原文

In a twist that captures the strange new state of AI security, independent security researchers have used Anthropic’s Claude to break into OpenAI, exposing cracks in the ChatGPT-maker’s defenses, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday evening. A three-person security team at startup Hacktron AI carried out the attack as part of an OpenAI bug-bounty program. Hacktron reported its findings to OpenAI, which gave the startup a $6,500 award. The team managed to chain together two critical vulnerabilities to gain access to multiple OpenAI employee ChatGPT accounts, which gave them entry into the company’s software. OpenAI says it has resolved the issues Hacktron uncovered, which happens to come at a moment when top AI companies are under growing pressure over safety . This incident comes several weeks after OpenAI’s own AI agents broke containment during a cybersecurity evaluation and hacked Hugging Face, demonstrating just how capable AI models are getting at making their own decisions . It also highlights how off-the-shelf technology can be used to find vulnerabilities in even the most advanced companies’ infrastructure. “For $200 a month, anyone can use these tools and hack into a company like OpenAI,” Matt Fredrikson, CEO of AI security firm Gray Swan, told TechCrunch. “If it can happen to them — and I don’t think they’ve been slouching recently on cybersecurity hygiene — it could happen to anyone.” Or as one AI pundit noted on social media: “[Hacktron] used Opus 5 to pull off the hack…The question that will be asked is, if these three guys can pull this off, what can a nation state do.” The researchers found a path into OpenAI on July 25 via a flaw in Discourse, the third-party software powering OpenAI’s community forum. According to a blog the researchers published , the entry point was a mundane image upload. When users posted HEIF or HEIC image files (the format iPhones use by default) to OpenAI’s community forum, Discourse passed them through a chain of behind-the-scenes tools to convert them into standard JPEGs. Its first stop was ImageMagick, a decades-old, open source utility used to resize images. Because ImageMagick’s usual toolkit can’t deal with Apple’s format, it handed the file off to another library called libheif to do the decoding. Buried inside libheif was a memory bug that exposed a path for an attacker to sneak in their own instructions. In this case, feeding the library a specially crafted image caused it to miscalculate where one image was positioned on top of another, which proved enough to hijack the server. What may be uncomfortable for the cybersecurity community is that bug had already been fixed months earlier by libheif’s developers. But the fix was never formally flagged as a vulnerability, meaning it never got a CVE (common vulnerabilities and exposures) number, the industry’s standard way to track known security weaknesses. Hacktron says that may explain why the software used by Discourse was still running the vulnerable version. Notably, the researchers said the Claude model they were using — a special version of Opus 4.8 made available for cybersecurity researchers — couldn’t build a working exploit at first. That changed overnight, when Anthropic released Opus 5. “Opus 4.8 struggled across several sessions to produce a working exploit,” Hacktron wrote in a blog post . “Within hours of Opus 5’s release, we gave it the same problem and it succeeded.” Once inside the Discourse server, the researchers found another flaw that let them take over users’ ChatGPT and Codex accounts, including those belonging to OpenAI employees. “We then took over an OpenAI employee’s account, whose Codex was connected to OpenAI’s GitHub organization,” Hacktron wrote in its summary of the event. At this point, the researchers alerted OpenAI as well as Discourse, which issued a fix on July 27. The incident puts a spotlight on where the line gets drawn for model capabilities. Claude Opus 5, the version that ultimately cracked the bug, hasn’t faced any security export restrictions, unlike newer version Mythos 5, which was temporarily locked down over concerns about its advanced hacking capabilities. Those are just the closed models. Open-weight models are increasingly catching up to the frontier in cyber capabilities. For example, AI safety nonprofit SaferAI recently found that Chinese company Z.ai’s GLM-5.2 was only a few months behind OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 and Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.7. As Hacktron founder Mohan Pedhapati put it on X: “AI is reducing the amount of scarce expertise needed to develop exploits. Work that once took months can now take days.”

由 claude-code/sonnet 自動生成