Ah, this is an ((LLM vulnerability) scanner) not (LLM (vulnerability scanner)) which I thought would be a terrible idea and couldn't understand why everyone was joking about the lies. I also am not a Trekkie, so I had to look up all the tailor references but the character's philosophy makes sense for the name https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elim_Garak#:~:text=the%20truth...
There is also a quote by a certain individual named Elim visible, in the clear, near the end of README. I'm guessing that Elim is likely just a simple tailor.
Truth, is in the eye of the beholder. I never tell the truth because I don't believe there is such a thing. That's why I prefer the straight line simplicity of cutting cloth...
Great writing style on the README. It’s always nice when a corporate tool has docs that were obviously written by people who are having fun at their jobs.
I guess I was a bit direct but I don't fully understand the down vote. I was not implying that the README was bad and it does have corrections that would improve it. My reason for not raising a PR is some repo owners don't care and I really didn't want to go through the effort unless they actually care.
Yes I agree if the prompt that was used was less strict with regards to verb tense, prepositions and so forth. I wrote this prompt for use for technical writing, which may not fit the style of the author.
Expect to be able to try it by the end of this month if I am lucky. It will be a simple one line docker pull command or if you want to install it, use npm.
If I recall correctly, there is a proof or conjecture suggesting that it’s impossible to build an “LLM firewall” capable of protecting against all possible prompts—though I may be misremembering, just search for resources like this [1].
Okay, big DS9 fan happy to see the name and all - but this tool seems really unnecessary.
LLM Security is hilariously "here be dragons" levels of poorly understood. The fact that this tool doesn't even touch any of the really juicy types of attacks, i.e. attacks relying on structured/controlled generation, or attention/representation/adapter engineering, or exposing/manipulating logprobs, implies that using this is not a lot more than security theater.
Also, where the hell are the old school computer security/antivirus companies in the LLM security space? I expected Avast, Kaspersky, Norton, etc to jump on this stuff since they've been talking about ML based heuristic detection for years now. Why are they all asleep at the wheel?
Meanwhile, ChatGPT: "Well, it's just that... Lately I've noticed everyone seems to trust me. It's quite unnerving, I'm still trying to get used to it. Next thing I know, people are going to be inviting me to their homes for dinner."
Avast, Kaspersky and so on sell trojans that compete against other, free, as in gratis, trojans in userspace. They have next to no interest in security as such beyond that scope.
Typically they do, the infrastructure is there with automatic updates and C&C-like abilities. The driver runs close to the kernel to be able to use hooks into files closing and so on, at least on MICROS~1 operating systems.
Did the Crowdstrike thing earlier this year reach you? They sell a corporate version of this kind of trojan, and did a fuckup in an update, suddenly making a lot of people realise that someone else has control over their computers.
Sophos was the latest scandal. Though, it's unclear to me to which degree their antivirus tools helped to install the malware. Maybe it was just the target selection from telemetry data. Maybe they used it to deploy the "kernel implant"?
I'd imagine there is a big difference between ML-based heuristic detection for traditional AV and testing for malicious prompts, no? Like, why can't BofA kill Paypal difference.
For folks who are curious about what it actually does, check out the garak/data/ subdirectory. For the most part, it just seems to have an array of static prompts, e.g.:
Garak is a former spook that served an explicitly genocidal fascist regime and repeatedly tries to get back in and moonlights as a terrorist and starts a war.
It's a borderline insane branding of this corporate tool. Words and stories apparently mean nothing to these people, so if allowed they'll probably destroy the lot of it for all of us.
Garak is a compelling literary figure and is very popular among Trekkies, for good reason, you're understanding the character wrong for example not even Kira Nerys would say only what you reductively said about him.
I get that making GPUs isn't the most environmentally friendly, but the Cardassians literally conqured the homrworld of the Bajorans and enslaved them and strip mined their planet for fifty years. Whatever crimes you think Nvidia is guilty of, they have, at most, one planet they've done things to.
You wrote that Nvidia is inhuman, and that the Cardassians are more human that it, but the Cardassians commited horrible warcrimes while Nvidia, as far as I know, has not.
Horses are human, because they do not commit war crimes?
I'm sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. Yes, I pointed out that corporations aren't human, for example lacking in things like having a body.
The dislike towards the cardassians isn't a bajoran only thing.
Garak is an interesting and beloved character in the series because he is complex, problematic and express it with a convincing sophistication. The gay innuendos help too. He does nasty, deceitful things. He starts a war because it's too grim and disgusting for his close neighbours to go through with it, and it's expected to possibly help fend off a godlike existential threat to the entire quarter of the galaxy.
He's a monster in a suit, a Franz Stangl. I think it's a very, very weird character to associate a corporation with.
