This blog is on the malwarebytes website. Malwarebytes says in thr post thst its not fair to call this spyware. This was brought up on the windows side as well.
What is really going on: claude desktop is installing the hooks for the claude browser extension. If you install the browser extension, claude desktop can control the browser. This is the intended behavior so you can have an agent do something like “in the morning, access these three sites, pull down the data and create a newsletter for me” or “please check flight costs throughout the day on these sites” or whatever you want to access the browser for.
This is the whole reason you install claude desktop, to automate your computer.
It also uses your credentials to do so and doesn’t ask any permissions for any of it including whatever else it wants to do outside the browser sandbox where it lives. Anthropic can easily remedy the situation but they didn’t set it up that way. And the question is why.
Not calling it spyware is like not calling McDonald’s “food”. While technically true, it’s just how it works.
I don’t think it’s actually doing anything nefarious yet. fwiw.
This is a little disengenuous…the browser extension ≠ the desktop app. Some people install the app and only use the chat feature. Some use cowork but would never want to use the browser extension. Assuming that installing a desktop app means you should also want the browser extension is just bad logic.
You cant access the browser unless you insta the extension. The desktop app just places jooks for the extension if it is ever installed. It wont work with out the extension
Side question, are the typos intentional?
Mobile keyboard without spellcheck, I make thr exact same typos as thst poster with my thick fingers.
Even if this was an opt-in feature the implementation is still terrible and a massive security hole. If id wanted the desktop app entirely and solely for this purpose i still would not expect my browser extension to have full access to my computer. I understand the app does, not the browser extension.
No matter how you twist and turn this situation Anthtopic has still introduced a major security issue in their application. It might be a bit far to call it malware immediately but it sure does open up a massive attack vector to take advantage of.
The fact that the end user is not even informed or have a choice about this makes it all the more problematic and Anthropic not commenting on it makes me think its either intentional or at the very least already known.
Now you’re just making stuff up.
Excuse me if im misunderstanding something but what exactly am i making up?
You admit you don’t understand extension development, but then present a conspiratorial hypothesis that has zero data to support it. How about the Researcher is wrong and no malware is being installed. Even the headline says ‘claims’ instead of ‘data proves’.
Did i say malware is being installed? And am i not allowed to hypothesize?
I see the security hole. I imagine some ways it could be abused by an attacker. I admit I am not knowledgable in extension development to make it clear those are hypothesized ideas. Hell theyre even phrased like question? I even agree this is not directly malware and that saying so is a stretch.
The security issue, as the blog says, is that it trusts any extension with the id. So if you can spoof the extension you have access.
What i was saying is that its not spyware. Which is a different issue.
Your comment seems very dismissive in the way you phrase this as intended behaviour. A security flaw like this can impossibly be intended behaviour.
In my previous comment i also say thats calling it malware is a bit far-fetched but the security issues are absolutely there and should not be dismissed as “intended behaviour”. Especially not by a company like Anthropic.
I am not well versed in extension development but is there anything stopping me from making an open source extension and just defining the ID as one of the three in the article? It most likely couldnt be released via the chrome addon store but if it is installed outside of thar? And how are these IDs read after install, could it potentially be altered by something from the outside?
I immediately see so many flaws with this implementation it is worrying that a company the size of Anthropic does this.
There are many flaws. I am in no way contradicting it or dismissing it.
American softwar company spying on its users…more news at 8
For its part, Apple has denied the claims, saying in a statement to The Wall Street Journal, “We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers.”
ok
Ah gee you’re right. Let’s shut down all the privacy blogs and communities. No reason to talk about privacy violations at all anymore.
You guys use AI? That’s bad for you.
Spyware installs spyware
I didn’t read the article, but imo better criticism would be how bad Claude engineering has been these past few weeks.
Theo did a video walking through just how bad Claude’s desktop app is. Like it’s embarrassingly bad for a company that claims to have a model so powerful that it spits out zero-day exploits like a vending machine.
Mythos? Nah, too busy working for the Government and high-profile customers. The Claude Desktop app was done by a couple of new AI models that are interning at Anthropic, hoping one day to work on the cooler stuff.
So anthropic is admitting inters are smarter than its models :)
Thatkfully templeOS is safe atm
“TempleOS” LARP LARP LARP SAHUR
Can you even do that? Like it is MacOS. it rusn everything in sandboxed enviournment doesnt it? This might be misleading. prove me wrong
MacOS already is one big spyware, why would anyone care of another one 😁
deleted by creator
If I would be in there for upvotes, I would’ve said how great MacOS is, and how much i love the apple :-) But thanks, have one back to outweigh the maclovers.
