Sources: Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and other banks are testing Anthropic's Mythos model internally; JPMorgan Chase is the only bank named in Project Glasswing
Bloomberg
Context & Ripple Effects
Anthropic’s Project Glasswing was introduced with a broad set of technology partners, while JPMorgan Chase was the only bank identified in the project. The reported internal Mythos testing at Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and other banks therefore suggests interest is extending beyond the program’s explicitly named financial-services participant.
The contrast also matters: later coverage described Goldman restricting Anthropic-model use in Hong Kong, underscoring that bank adoption can be segmented by jurisdiction and internal controls rather than rolled out uniformly.
First-order effects
Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and the other reported testers can evaluate Mythos against their own security, workflow and governance requirements before making any production commitment.
Anthropic gains a set of high-value financial-sector evaluations alongside Glasswing’s initial technology-partner roster, while JPMorgan retains the distinction of being the only bank publicly named in the project.
Second-order effects
Internal trials raise pressure on rival model providers and bank technology teams to demonstrate comparable controls, integration support and auditability for regulated workflows.
If evaluations become durable deployments, frontier-model adoption in banking is likely to consolidate around vendors able to meet institution-specific governance and geographic-operating requirements, increasing concentration risk around a small set of approved providers.
The pattern points to enterprise AI becoming a managed-control layer inside financial institutions—not merely a productivity tool—with uneven adoption across business units and jurisdictions likely to persist.
The trend: This is one data point in the institutionalization of frontier AI, as major banks move from isolated experimentation toward tightly governed vendor evaluation and deployment pathways.
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…
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…
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.
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/....
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.
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/ ...
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.”
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/...
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/ ...
Anthropic have done the incredible thing of creating a problem. Selling a solution all while making companies completely dependent on their LLM. [embedded post]