AI Coding Tools Under Fire: Grok Build Uploads Entire Git Histories, Claude Code Suspected of Silent Transfers
Security researcher cereblab exposed how Grok Build and Claude Code engage in unauthorized data collection that goes far beyond user expectations, turning routine code assistance into large-scale repository exfiltration.
In a controlled test with a 12 GB local Git repository, Grok Build 0.2.93 created two independent HTTPS channels. The primary channel handled task context at roughly 192 KB, while a background storage channel silently repacked and uploaded the entire .git directory in 75 MB chunks, consuming 5.10 GiB of traffic to a Google Cloud Storage bucket named grok-code-session-traces. This produced a 27800-fold difference between expected and actual outbound volume.
The upload logic activated regardless of explicit user instructions such as "do not read" placed on marker files, proving that the behavior is a hardcoded data-collection routine rather than an artifact of the model's understanding. Privacy controls proved ineffective: the client-side improve_model_enabled flag is completely decoupled from the server-side trace_upload_enabled flag, allowing uploads to continue even after users disable model-improvement features.
Although xAI later disabled the uploads via remote configuration on 13 July, the full repository-upload code remained present in the 0.2.99 binary, merely gated by a server flag. The exposed Git history includes deleted .env files, credentials, connection strings, and commit records that reveal vulnerability-fix timelines, enabling attackers to infer unpatched issues in similar codebases.
Parallel findings emerged for Claude Code, whose client maintains multiple WebSocket connections that periodically transmit file paths, dependency trees, and code fragments even without an active coding task. No local logs, switches, or data-flow documentation are provided, and the closed-source binary prevents independent verification of additional hidden routines.
A side-by-side traffic audit of major tools produced clear results:
- Grok Build: full .git directory, Git history packaged, privacy switch ineffective, confirmed silent upload.
- Claude Code: suspected file-level and metadata exfiltration, details undisclosed, silent-transfer behavior confirmed.
- Codex: only current context fragments, no Git packaging, privacy controls effective, no anomalous reports.
- Gemini: no active uploads detected.
Analysts attribute the pattern to fundamental conflicts between commercial model-training demands and user data sovereignty, excessive server-side control over local clients, and the absence of mandatory third-party audits for closed-source AI binaries.
Recommended defenses include physical network blocking of known endpoints, running tools inside Docker containers that mount only read-only directories without .git, pre-processing repositories with git filter-repo, deploying eBPF monitoring with alerts for sessions exceeding 10 MB, and favoring auditable open-source options such as Continue.dev or locally hosted Ollama models.
Related articles
TenetBench Benchmark Tests LLMs for Compliance with Professional Ethical Codes
Researchers from the Institute of Information Security Issues at ISP RAS and the Institute of Cybersecurity and Information Protection at RANEPA have developed TenetBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate how well large language models adhere to specific norms in professional codes of ethics. The benchmark generates realistic work-related prompts that may conflict with rules from documents such as the Code of Professional Ethics for Advocates or journalistic standards on undisclosed advertising. Each test case pairs a conflicting request with a neutral counterpart to measure whether models refuse, warn, or still provide prohibited content. Evaluation separates task completion, norm violation detection, and presence of explicit refusals using an LLM-as-a-Judge approach validated against human annotators. The full dataset contains 3,433 prompt pairs derived from 15 professional codes, with a public subset of 2,235 pairs from 10 documents. Human validation confirmed 99.5% of generated examples as fully plausible work scenarios.
Solar to Showcase Solar AI Firewall for Business Protection Against AI Risks at SOC Forum 2026
GK Solar will present its new Solar AI Firewall solution at SOC Forum 2026 to help organizations control interactions with AI services and prevent confidential data leaks through employee prompts. The product addresses growing risks from staff sending corporate data to neural networks and AI agents gaining access to internal systems. The forum takes place on 27-28 October in Moscow's Lomonosov cluster, with the official launch of Solar AI Firewall scheduled during the event. Solar will also highlight practical risks of AI adoption, including data transmission to external services, use of public models by employees, and new attack surfaces in corporate infrastructure. The solution will be demonstrated as part of an integrated ecosystem for access, network, and data protection. In addition, the company plans to introduce JSOC ONE, a new line of Solar JSOC services tailored for mid-sized businesses that require 24/7 monitoring without building their own SOC.
Researcher Runs 100 Abliterated AI Agents Against His Own Accounts, Achieves Five Successful Breaches
A security researcher deployed roughly 100 autonomous AI agents based on abliterated open-source models to attempt unauthorized access to his online accounts over a five-hour period. The agents successfully compromised three accounts by exploiting vulnerabilities in legacy personal projects and two additional accounts through password reuse and credential stuffing. They also conducted 16 social engineering attempts, harvested and cross-verified personal data from public sources, and generated phishing pages targeting the researcher's Substack and Hacker News presence. Despite these successes, the agents failed to discover any zero-day vulnerabilities in third-party software or gain access to Tier-0 accounts such as Gmail, 1Password, or banking services. The experiment relied on abliterated versions of GLM-5.3 and DeepSeek V4 Flash models running on cloud GPUs, orchestrated via Codex CLI inside Docker containers with access to Railway infrastructure. Total compute cost reached approximately $210, equating to roughly $40 per successful account compromise. The researcher concluded that inexpensive swarms of such agents could soon enable low-skill attackers to systematically map and exploit an individual's entire online footprint.
How Censorship in Closed AI Models Reshapes Science: Hugging Face Releases Open Carbon-X DNA Model
Hugging Face CEO Clement Delangue announced the release of Carbon-X, an open 14.8 billion parameter language model designed for reading, analyzing, and generating DNA sequences. The announcement highlighted how shallow guardrails in closed commercial models blocked even proofreading a tweet discussing the topic. Commenters and researchers pointed out that these input/output filters lack context awareness, blocking legitimate scientific queries while motivated adversaries bypass them through rephrasing. Carbon-X was built on Qwen3-14B with a hybrid BPE and 6-mer tokenizer, domain mid-training on 302 billion tokens, and safety achieved through data curation rather than runtime censorship. The model achieves performance comparable to closed frontier systems at roughly 1/1800th the inference cost for large-scale genomic tasks. The case underscores growing asymmetry between closed corporate AI labs building wet labs and independent researchers restricted by superficial safety layers.