AIToday
Large Language ModelsAI Safety & AlignmentTHE DECODERPublished: Jul 29, 2026, 06:00 JST

Anthropic's Mythos AI finds flaws in internet encryption standards

Anthropic's Mythos AI finds flaws in internet encryption standards

3 Key Points

  1. What happened

    Anthropic's Claude Mythos Preview AI model discovered an improved attack on the post-quantum signature scheme HAWK in 60 hours for $100,000 in API costs, and found a new attack on a reduced version of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) in roughly 1 billion tokens for about $100,000. The HAWK attack exploits a previously undetected symmetry in the mathematical lattice underlying the scheme; the AES attack uses a new fingerprinting method called "Möbius Bridge" that improves on the best previously known attacks by a factor of 200 to 800.

  2. Why it matters

    AES is the world's most widely used symmetric encryption standard for digital data, and HAWK is a candidate in the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) post-quantum standardization process. Although Anthropic says neither finding affects systems in use today—HAWK is not yet standardized and the AES attack applies to a modified 7-round version rather than the full 10-round scheme—the findings demonstrate that AI models could challenge core assumptions behind internet security and uncover vulnerabilities that human experts reviewing over two years did not detect.

  3. What to watch

    Anthropic shared its findings in advance with the U.S. government and industry partners and coordinated disclosure of the HAWK weakness with the scheme's authors. Mythos Preview remains unavailable to the public. Anthropic has also developed a benchmark called CryptanalysisBench with researchers from ETH Zurich, Tel Aviv University, and the University of Haifa to let others systematically evaluate the cryptanalytic abilities of language models.

Not sure about something? Ask the AI

Questions and answers are published on this page.

Summaries like this, in your inbox every morning.

Context & Analysis

Anthropic's disclosure marks a significant moment in cryptographic research: an AI model outperformed human experts in finding mathematical vulnerabilities in security-critical algorithms. The HAWK attack is particularly striking because human researchers with expertise in the field had spent over two years reviewing the scheme before Mythos Preview identified an improved attack in 60 hours. The model's discovery of a previously undetected symmetry in HAWK's underlying lattice suggests that AI systems can perceive mathematical structure in ways that differ from human intuition, even when human experts have focused scrutiny on the same problem.

The AES finding adds another dimension: Mythos initially resisted the task, writing that "AES-128 r5/r6 is just genuinely hard," but continued pursuing the problem only after being encouraged to seek "genuinely novel ideas." The resulting "Möbius Bridge" method improves efficiency by a factor of 200 to 800 over prior approaches. Both findings occurred with minimal human guidance—the HAWK work involved a project manager rather than a lattice cryptography specialist, and the AES research required only three substantive prompts over three days. This semi-autonomous capability suggests that future AI systems may discover vulnerabilities in cryptographic schemes during their development cycle, potentially allowing time for remediation before flaws become critical.

FAQ
Does this affect my encryption right now?
No. The HAWK attack applies to a scheme still in NIST's standardization process and not yet deployed. The AES attack applies to a modified version using 7 of the full scheme's 10 rounds, not the standard in use today.
How did the AI find these vulnerabilities so quickly?
For HAWK, Mythos Preview found the attack by exploiting a previously undetected symmetry in the mathematical lattice underlying the scheme, working semi-autonomously in a multi-agent system in 60 hours. For AES, the model developed a new fingerprinting method called "Möbius Bridge" that removes one guess an attacker must make and improves on the best previously known attacks by a factor of 200 to 800, generating several hundred million tokens over three days with minimal prompting.
How much did this research cost?
Each task cost about $100,000 in API fees—$100,000 for the HAWK attack over 60 hours, and approximately $100,000 for the AES attack across roughly 1 billion tokens over three days.

AI news that matters for your work, delivered every morning.

Pick your industry and the AI tools you use, and get news related to your work every day.

Free · 30 seconds with Google · unsubscribe anytimeWhat is AIToday? →

Ask AI

Ask AI anything about this article. The AI reads this article, earlier AIToday articles, and Wikipedia, and cites its sources. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.

Questions and answers are published on this page.

Related Articles

Next articleChip slump triggers panic selling despite strong memory demand