Sources: Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and other banks are testing Anthropic's Mythos model internally; JPMorgan Chase is the only bank named in Project Glasswing
Wall Street banks are starting to test AnthropicPBC's Mythos model internally as Trump administration officials encourage them to use it to detect vulnerabilities.
Bloomberg
Context & Ripple Effects
Mythos was positioned as a tightly controlled capability rather than a broad product: Anthropic said the preview would go to a limited group of organizations maintaining critical software in its restricted critical-software rollout. That makes internal bank testing an important expansion from selected infrastructure operators into a highly regulated customer base.
The tests also sit alongside Project Glasswing’s broad vendor coalition, whose launch partners included major cloud, chip, security and platform companies in Anthropic’s Glasswing partner rollout. JPMorgan Chase’s named role gives the banking adoption a more formal foothold than the other reported evaluations.
First-order effects
Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and other banks can evaluate Mythos against internal systems for vulnerability detection, while JPMorgan Chase becomes the publicly identified bank participant in Project Glasswing.
Anthropic gains high-value financial-sector validation for a model it has kept access-controlled; participating banks must handle the operational and governance review that accompanies internal testing.
Second-order effects
Other banks and their security suppliers face pressure to assess comparable AI-assisted vulnerability workflows, particularly if early pilots demonstrate useful findings without unacceptable control risks.
The overlap between Glasswing partners and bank testing can pull cloud, cybersecurity and enterprise-software vendors into banks’ evaluation and deployment processes rather than leaving the model as a standalone tool.
Third-order effects
If controlled pilots become durable deployments, frontier-model access for critical sectors may increasingly be mediated through approved partnerships, security reviews and government-aligned programs rather than general availability.
That pattern could deepen dependence on a small set of model providers and infrastructure partners; it also raises the likelihood that financial-sector oversight focuses on both AI-enabled security gains and concentrated model risk.
The trend: This is one data point in the institutionalization of tightly governed frontier AI as security infrastructure for critical, regulated industries.
1/The UK has been a global leader in tracking AI cyber capabilities for 2+ years. Our testing shows accelerating capabilities. The UK's @AISecurityInst most recently tested Anthropic's Mythos model, some reflections🧵 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ ...
At first glance, the recent news about Anthropic's Mythos model may seem like even more reason to halt AI development. In fact, it's the reason we can't. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ ...
Small banks and credit unions aren't built for this threat model. Most run on 1-2 outsourced cyber teams. That doesn't stand a chance against even high end open source models in adversarial mode.
Every single person saying “Anthropic made up mythos,” despite *JP Morgan* and many others being clearly concerned about it, is perfectly fulfilling this prediction. They think “perceiving AI models as highly capable” is an EA perversion intended to attain “regulatory capture.”
2/ Mythos is the most capable model we've ever evaluated for cyber and the first to complete our hardest cyber-range end-to-end. This represents a step up in AI cyber capabilities. We've taken action based on our findings.
3/ AISI works closely with the @NCSC. We've acted to protect critical national infrastructure and the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill will strengthen protections further, including making data centres CNI for the first time. https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/....
How anyone can doubt the need for AI guardrails is beyond me. The dangers grow more frightening by the day. My bipartisan legislative framework for protection & prevention of harm offers a path forward. https://www.nytimes.com/...
Anthropic have done the incredible thing of creating a problem. Selling a solution all while making companies completely dependent on their LLM. [embedded post]
Two months ago, the @realDonaldTrump administration was threatening @AnthropicAI with a virtual death penalty by declaring it a risk to the US military supply chain. Now, one Anthropic tool is so powerful that the administration seems scared out of its mind at what it could do.
Couple thoughts re: the Sam/Molotov cocktail thing and the wider issue of AI-related violence: 1. Most importantly, I'm glad no one got hurt. Besides the basic human perspective of “murder bad,” political violence is always bad, as is techno-political violence or whatever this
I would say there's a 20% chance that the molotov cocktail attack on Sam Altman's house was a FALSE FLAG to play victim after all the damning revelations from @RonanFarrow and the mogging from Anthropic on every dimension. Also, whenever Sam is in trouble he's posting his baby [i…
Molotov cocktail hurled at Altman's house, Indianapolis legislator's house shot up. Both this week. AI opposition getting scary. https://bigtechnology.substack.com/ ...
The journalist who took down Harvey Weinstein just spent 18 months investigating Sam Altman. And what he found out is genuinely insane: The people who built OpenAI went on record saying he can't be trusted with the future of humanity. A Microsoft executive even compared him [vide…