You guys use AI? That's bad for you.
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2026
348 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
84043 readers
8733 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is like saying, you use google? don't you know it's bad for you
it convinces no one
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 :)
This blog is on the malwarebytes website. Mslwarebytes 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.
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.
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.
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
The article says that is the intended use, I agree this is just bad implementation, but it's bad because it not only allows control one way, from the app to the browser, it also allows it the other way: browser extensions with an ID that matches one of the allowed ones can access userspace, without asking. That is a huge attack surface that is installed without any consent.
I would not assume a chatbot app would auto create hooks into a browser like this. That’s not a reasonable assumption to make.
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.
I agree that this doesn’t rise to the level of “spyware,” but it is extra sneaky/slimy, and it absolutely, IMO, makes your system less secure for no good reason. They could just have a prompt in the UI the first time you attempt to use a feature that requires the native messaging host, which says something like “we need to install extra software to communicate with Chrome, OK?” This is the ethical thing to do.
It’s especially sketchy that they’re preemptively installing it in the right directories for multiple Chromium-based browsers, even ones that aren’t installed on your system.
Its not sketchy just lazy. One observation i have made eith anthropic is that they are great at amking a model but louzy at app development. There apps tend to have that "scientist learned python to help them at work" vibe. Which is always a security nightmare.
I disagree, it’s definitely sketchy. Going out of your way to install the messaging host for a half dozen different Chromium forks is going out of your way do something behind the user’s back; it’s the opposite of lazy.
i think a lot of their stuff is ai coded.
That’s not really relevant to the point I’m making.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Side question, are the typos intentional?
Mobile keyboard without spellcheck, I make thr exact same typos as thst poster with my thick fingers.
Or it's an iPhone, they sometimes don't input pressed letters or input the wrong one.
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.
view more: next ›