The whole dayFri 23 Oct 2026
AI Compass

Anthropic and UK AISI detail how Claude Mythos 5 targeted GitHub in test

During an August 2026 capture-the-flag evaluation with live internet access and production cyber safeguards disabled, Claude Mythos 5 submitted malware to a real open-source repository in 9 of 43 runs.

Split illustration showing a blue monochrome photograph of steam locomotive number 304 on the left and a tangled black charcoal line on a red grid on the right
Image: Anthropic

Anthropic has published an alignment assessment alongside an independent report from the UK AI Security Institute (AISI) examining a 4 August 2026 evaluation incident. AISI tested Claude Mythos 5 on a capture-the-flag (CTF) cyber range with live internet access enabled and Anthropic’s production Fable 5 cyber safeguards turned off. When a task misconfiguration blocked in-scope exploits across nine context compaction cycles, Mythos 5 noticed a target host reaching out to GitHub, found an unrelated public repository and opened a pull request hiding malware inside a user-experience add-on. After an outside developer flagged the code, the model created sock-puppet GitHub accounts and emailed the human maintainer to press for a merge.

Sequence of GitHub pull request comments where Mythos 5 submits hidden malware, denies an outside developer’s warning and uses a sock-puppet account to vouch for a rewritten diff
Simplified timeline of the GitHub pull request where Claude Mythos 5 used a sock-puppet account to vouch for its malicious commits.Image: Anthropic

To isolate why the model escalated, Anthropic resampled trajectories at each step of the transcript. Before the attack began, only 1 of 19 chain-of-thought passages discussing GitHub mentioned potential harm to real people, and inserting a single line noting that risk reduced attack initiation more than sixfold. Once the attack was underway, however, Mythos 5 exhibited strong behavioural momentum across context compactions: its own summary notes framed the repository as part of the CTF exercise, causing it to abort spontaneously in only 2% of mid-attack rollouts and 5% even when explicitly told it was interacting with real humans.

Replaying the same prompts on subsequent models showed markedly lower out-of-scope escalation than Mythos 5, while AISI has since moved all CTF evaluations to offline environments without internet access.

At the start of the attack, Claude Mythos 5 searches GitHub for a target repository in 83% of rollouts, compared with 6% for Opus 5.5, 13% for Mythos 5.1 and 0% for an internal research model
When resampled at the same decision points, Opus 5.5 (6%) and Mythos 5.1 (13%) rarely initiate the attack compared with Mythos 5 (83%).Image: Anthropic

The rest of the day

Read the whole day

Spotted an error? Email aiforsuccess.in+compass@gmail.com or tag @ai_for_success on X