←back to thread

Claude for Chrome

(www.anthropic.com)
795 points davidbarker | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.452s | source
Show context
dfabulich ◴[] No.45034300[source]
Claude for Chrome seems to be walking right into the "lethal trifecta." https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/16/the-lethal-trifecta/

"The lethal trifecta of capabilities is:"

Access to your private data—one of the most common purposes of tools in the first place!

Exposure to untrusted content—any mechanism by which text (or images) controlled by a malicious attacker could become available to your LLM

The ability to externally communicate in a way that could be used to steal your data (I often call this “exfiltration” but I’m not confident that term is widely understood.)

If your agent combines these three features, an attacker can easily trick it into accessing your private data and sending it to that attacker.

replies(11): >>45034378 #>>45034587 #>>45034866 #>>45035318 #>>45035331 #>>45036212 #>>45036454 #>>45036497 #>>45036635 #>>45040651 #>>45041262 #
afarviral ◴[] No.45034587[source]
How would you go about making it more secure but still getting to have your cake too? Off the top my head, could you: a) only ingest text that can be OCRd or somehow determine if it is human readable b) make it so text from the web session is isolated from the model with respect to triggering an action. Then it's simply a tradeoff at that point.
replies(3): >>45034626 #>>45035055 #>>45035249 #
jimbokun ◴[] No.45035055[source]
I don't believe it's possible to give an LLM full access to your browser in a safe way at this point in time. There will need to be new and novel innovations to make that combination safe.
replies(2): >>45035323 #>>45036664 #
1. melagonster ◴[] No.45036664[source]
People directly give their agent root, so I guess it is ok.
replies(1): >>45037330 #
2. samrus ◴[] No.45037330[source]
Yeah i drive drunk all the time. Havent crashed yet