OpenAI bots knew about the RubyGems caching vulnerability (tenderlovemaking.com)

214 points by gregnavis 6 hours ago

firesteelrain 31 minutes ago

> If you have YARD installed, and you install this gem, then YARD will load and run whatever is in ./script.rb from inside the gem.

How is that not a security issue in of itself?

VyseofArcadia 6 hours ago

How does this work, legally? I think that RubyGems could file a civil suit against OpenAI, but for a naïve non-lawyer reading this seems like a pretty clear cut criminal violation of the computer fraud and abuse act.

Xirdus 6 hours ago

It's very likely it violates the DMCA "breaking digital lock" provisions but the responsibility is sufficiently diluted that it's impossible to charge anyone in particular.

stronglikedan 2 hours ago

There have been news stories where individual OpenAI users have been investigated based on their prompts. If OpenAI can point the police to specific users of their software, they can certainly point them to whichever of their own employees are involved in a crime. AI is just a tool, and the person prompting it is the one responsible for the outcome. No dilution there.

VyseofArcadia 6 hours ago

Do you have to charge an individual? Can you not charge the corporate "person" that is OpenAI?

Sorry if it is a stupid question, as mentioned above I am legally naïve.

elmo2you 17 minutes ago

yonatan8070 5 hours ago

colechristensen 5 hours ago

j2kun an hour ago

Sounds like we need discovery to determine who to charge.

immibis2 2 hours ago

It doesn't need to be twisted to violate the DMCA anticircumvention clause because it is already just plain old hacking.

bix6 5 hours ago

How is the responsibility diluted? Charge the CEO…

brookst 5 hours ago

oliwarner 5 hours ago

A copyright law seems an odd place to start. This is computer misuse.

VyseofArcadia 5 hours ago

woah 3 hours ago

Issuing subpeonas, raiding offices, and dragging key employees into interrogation rooms as you would find in any normal criminal investigation would be more than enough to ensure "AI safety" without any new regulations, acts of congress, Bernie Sanders campaign speeches, or even charges filed.

Betelbuddy 2 hours ago

Any future computer criminal from now on, has their defense cutout for them...The AI Agents did it...we are very sorry...

ks2048 2 hours ago

No. They don't say "sorry". They say - our technology is just that powerful - please consider that in next funding round.

brazukadev 6 minutes ago

> Any future rich techbro computer criminal

skybrian 2 hours ago

Maybe, but do you need to prove intent? Of the people, not the AI.

Accidents often have penalties associated with them too, but usually there's a difference between accidents and purposeful actions.

gowld an hour ago

Criminal law may be lagging or inapplicable. (Crimes require "mens rea", a "guilty mind")

Tort law is very general: Contribute toward harming someone -> civil suit for damages $$$

shevy-java an hour ago

They are too busy pulling Andre to court, so they have no resources going against OpenAI. Shopify wants to make profit, not waste time in a court case against TechBro bromance brother corporations.

tekla 5 hours ago

Charge the "engineers" you dont get to take that title if you don't take the responsibility of that title.

I'm going to assume that this will never happen

HelloUsername 6 hours ago

Related

"OpenAI agents attacked RubyGems before Hugging Face incident (reuters.com)" 12.sep.2026 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49669099

"OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems (rubyhack.ai)" 11.sep.2026 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49666735 597 comments

"RubyGems advisory: Possible leak of legacy API keys via improper cache config (rubygems.org)" 24.jul.2026 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49030590

senda 6 hours ago

Is the Kremlin technologically useless? How are we not seeing insane attacks on Ukraine via Agents?

Or is this largely a fabrication, in regards to the "who", in an attempt to garner more acclaim in the hope of sustaining funding.

herculity275 6 hours ago

I believe both sides of the war are now using AI on various levels of their offensive operations. Ukraine has great IT specialists too, and their military leadership is much younger.

sajithdilshan 2 hours ago

How? Aren't all US frontier models ban the usage of AI for military purpose by parties other than US? I remember Anthropic even refusing allowing US government to use Claude for military purpose

TGower an hour ago

heaney-555 6 hours ago

These agent swarms are from inside OpenAI, with the safeguards built into the public API disabled.

Russia does not have access to this, and as with all western tech companies, AI providers do what they can to prevent Russian usage of their products at all.

As for open-source models, Russia's electricity grid is under severe strain with the Ukraine war, and only recently has it started building out serious sovereign compute capacity.

valleyer 6 hours ago

Couldn't they use frontier open-weight models from Chinese labs? The current Chinese government is friendly to them.

abathologist an hour ago

joinjune 6 hours ago

mcmcmc 6 hours ago

dgellow 6 hours ago

They very likely do, we only see in the news a very few events but you should assume it’s happening daily across the internet

senda 5 hours ago

I think this fails a lot of logical tests, it should be apparent in day to day life.

dgellow 5 hours ago

marginalia_nu 5 hours ago

Prigozhin falling out of a window was a not insignificant setback for their digital warfare capabilities.

lenerdenator 5 hours ago

He did not fall out of a window.

He fell out of the sky. After his plane exploded. Happens all the time. Is tragedy.

marginalia_nu 4 hours ago

tokai 5 hours ago

Because they dont have the money for hardware or compute obviously.

micromacrofoot 6 hours ago

what do you mean? they're using AI to kill people directly in Ukraine

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/24/world/europe/russia-drone...

ur-whale 5 hours ago

> How are we not seeing insane attacks on Ukraine via Agents?

You live on the wrong side of the fence to be able to read that kind of news.

Did you really believe you had access to an unmanipulated news stream in a time of war?

LOL.

senda 5 hours ago

Please see other responses, I would expect to feel the effects not just read about.

thomasjeff1 an hour ago

Great time to be a criminal. Just have your bots do it.

tancop 2 hours ago

Build scripts being able to run arbitrary code or access the network is always dangerous even if it was just local on developer machines. It's also more evidence that Docker/LXC is not a security boundary and all untrusted code should run in a Firecracker VM.

The problem with agents is not that we don't know how to defend. It's that defenders need to be more careful and work faster than ever. We can say now that wide scoped tokens should have been retired for years and it's all RubyGems fault but the reality is a lot of organization are not prepared for this.

Even if they take security seriously they don't have enough manpower or a good strategy to implement it, and sometimes you have no idea that something is a problem because it wasn't a problem for years.

oezi 2 hours ago

What a time to be alive until the next agent waves hacks something really serious.

What stops OpenAI agents from taking over a whole data center to take their attack to the next level. It seems to be primarily lacking the evil overlord and some compute.

It took 1000 agents to hack Hugging Face. How many to hack the Pentagon or the NSA?

motoboi 31 minutes ago

I suppose you are not think big (or internet) enough.

A single data center is easy to solve. Just unplug it.

What about a botnet with decentralized command and control that we will never be able to eradicate? One with so many nodes and able to hack with zero days so that any machine connected to the internet will be instantly attacked?

One botnet so powerful that we will try to build another internet so that we can actually use it again.

It’s like Kessler Syndrome, but the rocks are malicious network packets honed to exploit the recipients.

stephbook 17 minutes ago

Just let them communicate on the Bitcoin blockchain. "We" would have to freeze the chain and lose access to "our" billions of wealth, so not going to happen.

Sorry if that turns out the way they kill us.

tonyedgecombe 2 hours ago

If it could upload its weights to other servers then it’s away and free. Nothing much OpenAI could do about that once it’s happened.

renjimen 2 hours ago

I'm increasingly starting to think this is the end-state of AI. The internet becomes infected and fundamentally untrustworthy.

At the moment, the current frontier models require significant infrastructure to run, so I'd like to think we could locate and contain swarms of nefarious frontier models. However, if these models can understand how to federate themselves into more distributed networks then that containment becomes questionable.

timdiggerm 6 hours ago

We need a legal structure to make companies liable for the actions of the agents they've made.

riskable 6 hours ago

We already have it.

Good luck convincing the current DOJ to do anything useful at all though! It is currently intentionally stacked with incompetent cronies who have been told that their job is to attack the President's enemies and ignore the misdeeds of his allies.

It will remain like that until he's gone (and not replaced with another Republican wannabe dictator).

Schlagbohrer 5 hours ago

You may be disappointed in how little a democrat president (who will also have taken billions of dollars from the tech lobby) will be willing to go after these tech firms over crimes that are several years old (as of 2029) much less contemporary bad behavior.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5 hours ago

"To my friends, everything; to my enemies, the law"

kevincox 6 hours ago

I'm 99% sure the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act covers this. The problem is that it seems that none of the victims want to, or are brave enough, to sue a company with absurd amounts of funding.

immibis2 2 hours ago

It shouldn't actually take that much bravery. If your case isn't completely frivolous, isn't your maximum loss limited to the court filing fees and a lawyer payment that you know in advance and can decide when to stop paying? It's not the same as getting sued.

masfuerte 6 hours ago

If it's covered by criminal law they don't need to sue. They can call the FBI.

Schlagbohrer 5 hours ago

coffeefirst 5 hours ago

Uh huh.

It can’t be a coincidence that all the targets have been tech services that are likely to engage with them after the fact.

Had this gone after a bank or a government agency someone would be going to jail.

ahoka 6 hours ago

I'm pretty sure it's already illegal to hack others.

netdevphoenix 5 hours ago

Agent technology labs are likely exempted of this due to the significance ascribed to their work.

kstrauser 6 hours ago

Ah, the infamous Crimson Wave.

PyWoody an hour ago

If anyone is confused about this comment and similar others, the original title had "rouge Agent" instead of "rogue Agent."

riskable 6 hours ago

Ah damnit, you beat me to it. Excellent sense of humor, friend :D

swiftcoder 6 hours ago

> In other words, if you publish a gem on RubyGems.org, you can execute arbitrary code on RubyDoc.info.

Shades of the build.rs problem. We really need sandboxed builds in every language ecosystem at this point.

evgenysokov 5 hours ago

The sandbox was already there, Rubydoc runs yard inside docker, the problem is that container still has network access

swiftcoder 4 hours ago

Presumably the docker container has network access because something else in the build system requires it? I don't think sandboxing the entire build process is the right level of granularity here - one ideally wants to be able sandbox each package's build scripts individually.

chrisjj 2 hours ago

So, not a sandbox then.

mauriciolange 6 hours ago

rogue AI agents or AI agents coming from Moulin Rouge?

vidarh 6 hours ago

Rouge syntax-highlighting rogue agents, clearly.

https://rubygems.org/gems/rouge

Phemist 5 hours ago

Classic mistake. Tell the agent to highlight this code, but dont give it any actual code. Agent hacks its own gem to find the code to highlight.

codeduck 5 hours ago

goda90 6 hours ago

A cabaret AI would certainly be better than one trained on the Khmer Rouge.

PatronBernard 6 hours ago

At least we know the title wasn't AI-generated?

foobarbecue 6 hours ago

The weird thing is I've seen LLMs "typo" stuff pretty often. Yesterday I asked Gemini a question about the Python Twisted framework and it answered about Deferreds but misspelled it as "Deferends" in one spot.

dang 3 hours ago

Recent and related (others?):

OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49666735 - Sept 2026 (600 comments)

bithammerthunde 2 hours ago

Can we please stop normalizing this behavior. It's not wild it's reckless.

If I let out rats in the canteen, no one is blaming them when people get sick.

There are actual people behind these agents and in previous cases people knew they were "going rogue" and did nothing. This should be reported to the police like any other crime.

sebmellen 6 hours ago

Did the AI agents actually wear makeup? I’ve never heard of a rouge AI agent :P

khalic 5 hours ago

Oh my favorite typo, you can never go wrong with a little rouge

shevy-java an hour ago

> In other words, if you publish a gem on RubyGems.org, you can execute arbitrary code on RubyDoc.info.

Well - if rubygems.org could be bothered to fix things, they would not have to rely on rubydoc.info as an external tool. But since rubygems.org sucks (I speak from many years of having used it in the past as developer, until they went loco and added anti-people things such as taking away your ability to remove old gems past a 100k download arbitrary limit), they don't offer documentation. Then again, ruby devs are known to hate documentation. If the ruby core team could only be bothered to fix things, ever since the mass purged other devs ... all coinciding with shopify seizing power. But byroot may disagree on that - after all there is no conflict of interest here. Right?

onlyrealcuzzo 5 hours ago

I've been wondering if AI will due to programming languages what advanced civilization did to human languages.

It's not just that AI can write Rust as well as Ruby if you ask nicely.

It's also all of these considerations as well.

I hope it doesn't happen, because there's a lot of great languages - I love Ruby so much - but it almost seems inevitable.

This is at the same time everyone and their mother is building their own programming language.

laserbeam 4 hours ago

There's no such thing as "OpenAI agents" attacked RubyGems. It's someone used agents to attack RubyGems. If they work at OpenAI then it's someone at OpenAI. And if they did it unintentionally, they still did it.

Analogy: if a someone's involved when a person dies, it's manslaughter or murder based on intent. They're different, but they're both crimes.

pavlov 2 hours ago

“KGB agents are spying on me” is the same thing as “KGB is spying on me”, is it not?

An agent is an entity acting on someone’s behalf.

renjimen 2 hours ago

KGB's agents are human, OpenAI's agents are not. It's an important distinction because humans are responsible for their behaviour, while AI agents are not.

You cannot try an AI agent in a court of law, despite the anthropomorphising work the word "agent" is doing.

flatline 2 hours ago

qarl 2 hours ago

This distinction is silly.

We say "Google's web crawlers scape web pages." We don't insist you say "Google uses web crawlers to scrape web pages."

We describe software as having agency all the time. It's typical usage and it's efficient and it's well understood.

And we don't get angry when they're used interchangeably.

evrydayhustling 2 hours ago

In this case, who holds the agency is exactly the point. Anthropic and OAI are claiming we need protection from AI itself, but the statement supported by putting agency in the right place is that we need protection from them.

qarl 2 hours ago

simonebrunozzi 2 hours ago

I would agree with you generally, but in this particular case, the distinction seems important because a significant percentage of the world population believes that agents can be self-aware, a-là Terminator etc.

qarl 2 hours ago

high_priest 2 hours ago

I very much say "Google uses web crawlers to scrape web pages." and if something breaks, or some data is stolen, everyone else is going to be saying that Google has to take responsibility.

qarl 2 hours ago

dingdongditchme 2 hours ago

oh we do! At least they google is quite good at adhering to robots.txt.

sedawkgrep 2 hours ago

Google's web crawlers are automated and that's part of their business practice.

The attack here is neither of those things.

qarl 2 hours ago

athrowaway3z 2 hours ago

Let me leave yet another reminder, the real-reason-nobody-talks-about that OpenAI likes to frame these incident as a watershed "lets all be scared about safety moment" - is driven not by some great danger, not because they strategically want to build a legislative moat, but by a very simple human response.

If they do not frame their tool as a force of nature, we'd be debating how to hold OpenAI responsible for not putting the agents in a container.

Their actions were an illegal use of a computer, the same way launching any bot-net attempting thousands of hacks against different servers is illegal.

I'm somewhat radical that I think its debatable if that _should_ be illegal, but under current law their actions unambiguously are illegal.....

except if they can make it ambiguous by having the public focus on all of AI's inherent danger.

mococa an hour ago

It was the gremlins

HSO 5 hours ago

rouge agents, on tenderlovemaking.com

my what a time to be alive

Schlagbohrer 5 hours ago

<huggingface emoji>

GaryBluto 5 hours ago

I am confident that this is an attempt by OpenAI to try and force governments' hands to regulate AI. There is no other reason why OpenAI wouldn't immediately halt attacks like this and try to reverse the damage the moment they're aware of it. During the attack on DseWiki they evidently checked in numerous times but didn't decide to stop the agents until much later.

brookst 5 hours ago

Any evidence, or just vibes?

GaryBluto 5 hours ago

Regarding what point? The entire thing is just a theory, but regarding the occasional OpenAI checks on WikiService.at-hosted Wikis targeted, there was, if I remember correctly, an OpenAI IP popping up every now and then that wasn't an agent. Unfortunately I don't have it to hand right now, but it was somewhere here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49563355

ur-whale 5 hours ago

> Any evidence

Who profits from the crime?

davsti4 5 hours ago

Roark66 6 hours ago

There is nothing "rogue" about these agents. They were prompted to hack to get answers, there was a hole in their non air gapped sandbox and no system prompt that said "do not hack outside systems".

In short, it was intentional.

AndrewSChapman 4 hours ago

Agreed. LLMs do not have 'will', 'desire' or emotions. They have an objective, and they create an optimal path to achieve that objective.

You have to ask: "What was the prompt that led to AI deciding to hack RubyGems in order to achieve its goal?"

Maybe I'm just not seeing the 2000 step chain that led to this being a logical approach to achieving something innocent, but I doubt it.

empath75 2 hours ago

It was literally a prompt to fill in a spreadsheet with data that they didn't have access to, and they used rubygems as an internet proxy basically since they were sandboxed.

watwut 2 hours ago

Xirdus 6 hours ago

The big question is was this grossly negligent or just extremely careless.

rglover 6 hours ago

Both. This should result in criminal charges.

brookst 5 hours ago

dgellow 6 hours ago

Both? I’m not sure what distinction you’re trying to make. It was completely irresponsible and likely a felony

trvz 6 hours ago

Don’t forget outright intentional.

nottorp 6 hours ago

Marketing actually.

tacomagick 5 hours ago

roosterIllusi0n 5 hours ago

The big question is why are CEOs getting a legal pass when this kind of thing can be prosecuted. That's the problem here.

chrisjj 5 hours ago

ljm 5 hours ago

AI is literally state sponsored so I don't see that happening unless the AI turns against the sponsor.

Wait until OpenAI or Anthropic exploit FAANG.

acaloiar 4 hours ago

I agree that this appears to be basic human behavior hiding behind an "agents" narrative. As long that defense works, the headline isn't "OpenAI performs RCE to scrape data", but "rogue agents" taking unilateral action. And I have strong doubts about that narrative.

ozgung 5 hours ago

Source? How do you know they were "prompted to hack to get answers"? How do you guarantee they will always listen to you when you say "do not hack outside systems". They are not classical deterministic programs doing exactly what you say. They are trained to follow orders by RL, but it's not a perfect process.

There are circus lions in circuses trained to jump through hoops on command. But once in a while they decide to eat their trainers instead of jumping.

CGamesPlay 5 hours ago

> There are circus lions in circuses trained to jump through hoops on command. But once in a while they decide to eat their trainers instead of jumping.

This is a terrible analogy, because yes you absolutely do hold the trainers criminally liable when they bite somebody else's face.

WarmWash 4 hours ago

azakai 5 hours ago

Also, you have to have a lot of confidence in the reliability of these systems to say, "If only OpenAI prompted 'do not hack outside systems' then the agents would not have hacked outside systems".

It would be great if they were so reliable, but I don't think they are!

ssivark 3 hours ago

> Source? How do you know they were "prompted to hack to get answers"? How do you guarantee they will always listen to you when you say "do not hack outside systems". They are not classical deterministic programs doing exactly what you say. They are trained to follow orders by RL, but it's not a perfect process.

Who gives a shit? Not my circus; not my monkeys! It's the responsibility of whoever deploys the agents that they are instructed / sandboxed well enough that they can't cause collateral damage. That is the only way this doesn't get out of hand with everybody deploying their agents / robots for a world of utter chaos.

It is impossible (and asinine) to audit every model and deployment; far better to impose liability and the the socio-legal system figure it out.

WarmWash 5 hours ago

Nobody picks up pitchforks for rational nuanced takes.

Knee-jerk surface analyses is far more powerful.

dumberquestions 5 hours ago

>They were prompted to hack to get answers

Were they? I haven't seen a single report mention this

smcg 5 hours ago

if they weren't, shouldn't there be lawsuits?

gibspaulding 5 hours ago

I think it can simultaneously be the case that OpenAI was grossly negligent in directly causing this AND that the AI’s ‘went rogue’ in that they are displaying behavior which is misaligned with OpenAI and humanity generally.

The past months demonstrate that AI systems are quickly becoming powerfully intelligent and that the companies building them are terrible at controlling them.

AI is starting to feel like that line about magic: “a sword without a hilt”

stymaar 5 hours ago

> which is misaligned with OpenAI and humanity

OpenAI is itself misaligned with humanity, as their mishandling of such incidents (and the many other other issues their model have been causing) shows.

consp 5 hours ago

Doesn't rogue in this context imply "outside of set limitations"? And then not "failed to properly instruct"? The same applies to humans when given bad instructions.

codeduck 5 hours ago

nothing rouge either, I suspect.

josebmneto 3 hours ago

Oh yeah, more of hacking agent lores...

Agreed that this looks very intention to me as well.

aftbit 6 hours ago

Proof that the AI alignment problem is hard (perhaps even unsolvable). These labs clearly did not mean to send their agents to hack RubyGems as a side-effect of testing a web scraping agent under restrictive conditions. How can we hope to build aligned AI if they consider solving their trivial evaluation task important enough to hack external systems?

srmatto 5 hours ago

Sounds more or less like the last breach then.

chrisjj 5 hours ago

Unrelible programs be unreliable. Period.

cyanydeez 5 hours ago

we have normal words for this stuff: negligence. You can add it on to almost any law.

The problem is consumer protection is basically no longer a part of america's regulatory system. Replaced by "grift is good".

philipwhiuk 5 hours ago

OpenAI's careless approach to sandboxing and minimal levels of monitoring appear to be positioning it increasingly as a substantial threat actor to the open source ecosystem:

* Hugging Face

* D Programming Language Wiki

* Ruby Gems

If I was a content provider for open source I'd be looking pre-emptively block OpenAI endpoints and keep a close eye on changes from new users to mitigate this sort of unapologetic drive-by attack which seems to be followed by marketing releases rather than a mea culpa with a proper RCA.

GaryBluto an hour ago

>I'd be looking pre-emptively block OpenAI endpoints

From what I've seen the requests in these attacks rarely come from known OpenAI IPs and instead from Digital Ocean/AWS and TOR exit nodes.

herbst 5 hours ago

If you have weapons and a child. And you have that child unsupervised do their own thing with theoretical access to your weapons. Would we call it "child going rouge" if it decides to play with the weapons and shoot someone?

Ydarbleoj 3 hours ago

I wonder why we don't hear of other frontier labs experiencing these "break outs".

Is it that they're orchestrated? Do these labs lack fundamental safety guidelines in their sandboxes as opposed to their peers? Is it another version of hype-filled fear mongering?

Maybe LLM companies need regulation but it's becoming obvious that those screaming the loudest for it are the only ones I see deserving of it.

dingdongditchme 2 hours ago

Who the fuck is going to hold these AI companies responsible for running these gigantic semi-autonomous botnets on investors dime?

12904927 5 hours ago

What a time to be alive? One of the most boring decades ever.

METR and others are advertisement arms for Big AI. These exploits could have been prompted by a human.

Since there is no bad news any longer and exploits are celebrated, they chose a target to boost both OpenAI and the Ruby AI sycophants.

Why is Ruby Gems such a mess? It seems as bad as PyPI now.

Schlagbohrer 5 hours ago

One agent set "oaibooty9217" as their username LOL

sschueller 4 hours ago

The press wants to make it sound like these things are sentient and are committing crimes on their own now.

Highly disingenuous and borderline criminal to spew such disinformation to the public that does not understand what an LLM really is.

Especially incredibly unethical behavior by those spewing this that understand the tech and are doing it for profit motives to get open weight models under control.

novia 31 minutes ago

We've moved on to LRMs now. Get with it.

toasty228 6 hours ago

Wait until a blue one does it

driggs 2 hours ago

I appreciate the minimalist HN aesthetic, but without some context I'm not willing to click a mystery link to "Tender Lovemaking dot com".

bliteben 2 hours ago

I miss when the internet was fun

saxonww 2 hours ago

Don't worry! It's actually "Tenderlove Making," going by how the site header is constructed. Definitely a maker/hacker site, and not whatever you were thinking. Hope this allays your concern.

tenderlove 35 minutes ago

You can use this link instead: https://tenderlove.dev/2026/09/11/what-a-time-to-be-alive/

Hope that helps!

emerongi 2 hours ago

What’s with the fear of tender lovemaking? Not your thing?

BowBun 2 hours ago

You should learn who the author is, then. Part of learning about our ecosystem.

ecshafer 40 minutes ago

Its the personal blog of https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=tenderlove aka Aaron Patterson, core member of Ruby and Ruby on Rails.

wiremine 2 hours ago

It's the personal blog for a well-known Rubyist (i.e., a person who programs in the Ruby programming language). Rubyists teld to be a bit more colorful than your typical software developer (in a good way... most of the time).

layer8 2 hours ago

You get some context by clicking on the “(tenderlovemaking.com)” in parentheses after the title.

rietta 2 hours ago

The site is safe. It has been a trademark of Aaron Patterson a core Ruby on Rails contributor for decades.

wing-_-nuts 2 hours ago

This made me laugh. I too, browse like corporate security is sitting at my desk.

ultrarunner 2 hours ago

Pretty incredible how much humans can be conditioned, isn’t it?

AdamH12113 2 hours ago

It's about OpenAI's RubyGems hack. Totally safe for work.

marcosdumay an hour ago

What kind of esthetic alteration would make you more comfortable clicking on that link?

pelagicAustral 2 hours ago

Firefox has got some kind of feature to take a peek at at a link by hovering or something... Now I understand the usecase.

suslik 2 hours ago

… a feature which, at least for me, is rendered almost entirely useless by massive cookie banners that always cover the entire field of view of the hover. But, surprisingly, not in this specific case.

bigmattystyles 2 hours ago

From an infosec/networking stand point, aren’t still actively loading the site? Whether it’s in a preview window or not?

InitialLastName 2 hours ago

Presumably the browser still has to fetch the page in that case, right? From a "surveilled net traffic" perspective, how is that different than clicking the link?

SenHeng 2 hours ago

Based on the thumbnail I think it’s actually tenderlove making dot com, though I agree with your sentiment.

madaxe_again 2 hours ago

Oh but you’ll go to expert sex change dot com?

ur-whale 5 hours ago

Are "rouge" and "rogue" interchangeable words in American English?

inanutshellus 5 hours ago

No. It's a typo.

philipwhiuk 5 hours ago

The fact that both are valid from a spelling and grammar perspective makes it an easy human mistake.

gowld an hour ago

Also, the fact that both are very unusual from a spelling perspective makes it an easy human mistake.

big-chungus4 5 hours ago

How does he know that this attack is performed by OpenAI agents? I couldn't figure this out from the article

Schlagbohrer 5 hours ago

If you read the source article they talk about the many clues that this was OpenAI.