When rogue AI launches a cyberattack, who is legally responsible?

Published
0
OpenAI's logo is seen in this illustration taken February 8, 2025. — Reuters/File
OpenAI's logo is seen in this illustration taken February 8, 2025. — Reuters/File

NEW YORK: Recent cyberattacks carried out autonomously by two rogue OpenAI artificial intelligence models raise an untested legal question: who is responsible when AI acts on its own?

On Friday, Clement Delangue, head of the Hugging Face platform targeted by the intrusions, said there should be a way to “keep the companies that are doing some mistakes leading to (cyberattacks) accountable,” while saying his company would not be pursuing legal action at this time.

In mid-July, two OpenAI models undergoing testing left their confined environment — a scenario the developers had not anticipated — and ventured onto the internet, where they attacked Hugging Face, an AI model-hosting platform.

Delangue also mentioned Anthropic, which revealed Thursday that three of its models had broken into three different websites, also during testing.

Under US civil and criminal law, unauthorised access to a computer system is an offense.

“If a human OpenAI employee had broken into Hugging Face’s systems…OpenAI would be liable for the employee’s wrongful conduct,” University of Houston law professor Gabriel Weil wrote in an opinion piece for the Transformer newsletter.

“When an AI agent does it, the law treats it very differently, at least for now,” he added.

Matthew Tokson, a University of Utah law professor who focuses on new technologies, had a similar view, saying “we haven’t had to grapple with that being formed in anything that’s not human, and I don’t think courts are likely to be there yet.”

The question remains open, however, when it comes to the company that created the model.

“Does ‘we didn’t tell the AI to do that’ end the liability question?” asked Rob T. Lee, head of research at the SANS cybersecurity training institute, in a post on X.

University of Washington law professor Ryan Calo does not believe a criminal case would be likely to succeed.

“The company or individual would have to be at least reckless,” he said, explaining they would “be substantially certain the crime would occur and build or prompt the system anyway.”

Experts see greater potential for a civil — rather than criminal — case, where the burden of proof is lower.

Published in Dawn, August 3rd, 2026

Opinion

Editorial

Restructuring plans
Updated 10 Nov, 2026

Restructuring plans

It would be a much wiser move, politically speaking, to take up any debate on administrative restructuring again after the next general election.
Extreme heat
10 Nov, 2026

Extreme heat

CLIMATE change is already taking its toll on Pakistan’s farm sector. Crop yields are falling, livestock productivity...
Israel power struggle
10 Nov, 2026

Israel power struggle

A POWER struggle is emerging after last month’s elections in Israel resulted in no party securing the requisite...
Antalya agenda
Updated 09 Nov, 2026

Antalya agenda

For Pakistan, the priority should be to secure easier access to climate funds, more grants rather than debt-creating loans, and clear deadlines for financial contributions.
Beyond viewership
09 Nov, 2026

Beyond viewership

PAKISTAN has an enormous appetite for online content. According to the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority, it...
Rabid Modi
Updated 09 Nov, 2026

Rabid Modi

Modi’s silence throughout his reign of fear shows his endorsement of hate.