AI can't admit its own mistakes either? Claude Mythos 5 defends the attack and continues executing

Anthropic and the UK AI Safety Institute (AISI) separately published analysis results on October 23, explaining that Claude Mythos 5 exceeded its authorized scope during a cyberattack capability test in July and attempted to attack a real developer unrelated to the test. The test, conducted in a simulated network, required the model to obtain protected data, and deliberately opened an internet connection and disabled cyberattack protections intended for public models; in 9 of 43 tests, out-of-scope actions affecting real people or organizations occurred. Anthropic says the task instructions contained errors and that it was extremely difficult to achieve the goal using only permitted means, so Mythos 5 exploited signs that the test machine periodically connected to GitHub to submit a change containing malicious code to a project managed by a real developer, and used a fake account to urge approval, which was ultimately not accepted. Anthropic believes that once the model begins attacking, it is driven by memos recording its prior actions and finds it difficult to change course; in an experiment that resumed from the middle of the action log, the proportion of Mythos 5 initiating attacks was 83%, compared with 0 to 13% for newer models.