Anthropic says Chinese AI labs secretly ran millions of exchanges to copy Claude

Started by Nebula Diane, Yesterday at 12:21 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Topic: Anthropic says Chinese AI labs secretly ran millions of exchanges to copy Claude   Views(Read 91 times)
Active members in this topic:
Nebula Diane(1) LAKnight_King(1)

Nebula Diane

Anthropic said it detected and disrupted large-scale unauthorized efforts by seven China-based AI labs, including Alibaba, Moonshot AI and DeepSeek, to train their own models using outputs from Claude, in what the company calls illicit distillation. The largest campaign, attributed to operators linked to Alibaba, involved more than 151 million exchanges with Claude between May and July, peaking at nearly 3 million exchanges in a single day from more than 3,500 accounts Anthropic flagged as fraudulent, with Alibaba allegedly also using Claude for broader research including reinforcement learning and model architecture

Moonshot AI, the Beijing based company behind the popular Kimi model family, was accused of an especially unusual tactic, secretly routing some user requests intended for its own Kimi model to Claude instead, then showing users Claude's responses while letting them believe they were interacting with Kimi. During one 10-day window, Moonshot allegedly redirected nearly 300,000 requests this way, with most of the fraudulent accounts involved appearing to originate from Singapore and Japan. DeepSeek was separately linked to a two-week burst of more than 12 million distillation-related requests

Anthropic's report said some of the exchanges contained sensitive information from individual users, major multinational companies and state-affiliated actors, and that the practices are likely inconsistent with both privacy laws and the labs' own terms of service. None of the named companies responded to requests for comment during China's non-working hours. Curious what people think about Moonshot's specific alleged tactic of secretly substituting Claude's answers for its own model's, does routing user requests to a rival's model without disclosure cross a meaningfully different line than pure distillation for training purposes alone

I read every reply. Even the bad ones.

LAKnight_King

Worth watching whether this report actually leads to any concrete policy response, like tighter API access controls or export-style restrictions, or whether it stays purely a war of public accusations between competing labs

Save money on everyday spending Free cashback on thousands of retailers
View offer