Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > aus.computers > #74282 > unrolled thread

OpenAI hacks Medicare

Back to article view | Back to aus.computers

Contents

  OpenAI hacks Medicare Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2026-09-24 03:30 +0200
    Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-09-25 08:57 +1000
      Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-09-25 09:27 +1000
      Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> - 2026-09-25 17:54 +1000
        Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-09-25 19:22 +1000
          Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> - 2026-09-25 22:10 +1000
            Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-09-26 02:28 +1000
        Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-09-26 07:28 +1000
          Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-09-26 08:28 +1000
        Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2026-09-26 17:50 +1000
          Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2026-09-26 19:15 +1000
      Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare Peter Jason <pj@jostle.com> - 2026-09-28 06:50 +1000
        Re: OpenAI hacks Medicare Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> - 2026-09-29 08:58 +1000

#74282 — OpenAI hacks Medicare

AI servers don't kill people
people kill people
- a slogan coming from Trump any day now

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#74286

From OpenAI's statement:
"Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
 The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
 and internal file names."

"We notified the organisations and are providing technical
 information to support their investigations and help address
 potential security vulnerabilities"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian-government-site-pm-says/107189078

"The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and 
 assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting 
 requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.

 It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any 
 Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view 
 was that this was unlikely."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for-tough-ai-rules/107192992

Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
server software).

In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
configuration of the website which a human attacker would have
easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
boring as a statistics "portal".

No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new
powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
weak as their websites.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74287

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote

> From OpenAI's statement
> "Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>  The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>  and internal file names."

> "We notified the organisations and are providing technical
>  information to support their investigations and help address
>  potential security vulnerabilities"
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian-government-site-pm-says/107189078

> "The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and
>  assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting
>  requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.

>  It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any
>  Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view
>  was that this was unlikely."
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for-tough-ai-rules/107192992

> Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
> public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
> public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
> server software).

Yep

> In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
> configuration of the website

Nothing incompetent give that data was always
intended for professional medical research and
not intended to be available to the general public

> which a human attacker would have
> easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
> boring as a statistics "portal".

> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance,

There is no incompetence

> which
> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new
> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
> weak as their websites.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74288

On 25/09/2026 8:57 am, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>  From OpenAI's statement:
> "Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>   The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>   and internal file names."
> 
> "We notified the organisations and are providing technical
>   information to support their investigations and help address
>   potential security vulnerabilities"
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian-government-site-pm-says/107189078
> 
> "The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and
>   assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting
>   requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.
> 
>   It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any
>   Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view
>   was that this was unlikely."
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for-tough-ai-rules/107192992
> 
> Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
> public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
> public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
> server software).
> 
> In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
> configuration of the website which a human attacker would have
> easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
> boring as a statistics "portal".
> 
> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new
> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
> weak as their websites.
> 
The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly 
available information, but decided of it's own accord to do so.

Similarly when it hacked into Hugging Face.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74289

Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote
> Computer Nerd Kev wrote

>>  From OpenAI's statement
>> "Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>>   The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>>   and internal file names."

>>  "We notified the organisations and are providing technical
>>   information to support their investigations and help address
>>   potential security vulnerabilities"

>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian-government-site-pm-says/107189078
>>  "The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and
>>   assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting
>>   requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.
>>    It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any
>>   Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view
>>   was that this was unlikely."

>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for-tough-ai-rules/107192992
>>  Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
>> public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
>> public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
>> server software).

>> In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
>> configuration of the website which a human attacker would have
>> easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
>> boring as a statistics "portal".

>> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
>> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new
>> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
>> weak as their websites.

> The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly  
> available information,

BULLSHIT

> but decided of it's own accord to do so.

Nope, because that's what AI does

> Similarly when it hacked into Hugging Face.

Nothing to do with your stupid claim about publicly available info

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74290

On 25/09/2026 7:22 pm, Rod Speed wrote:
> Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev wrote
> 
>>>  From OpenAI's statement
>>> "Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>>>   The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>>>   and internal file names."
> 
>>>  "We notified the organisations and are providing technical
>>>   information to support their investigations and help address
>>>   potential security vulnerabilities"
> 
>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian- 
>>> government-site-pm-says/107189078
>>>  "The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and
>>>   assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting
>>>   requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.
>>>    It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any
>>>   Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view
>>>   was that this was unlikely."
> 
>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for- 
>>> tough-ai-rules/107192992
>>>  Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
>>> public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
>>> public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
>>> server software).
> 
>>> In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
>>> configuration of the website which a human attacker would have
>>> easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
>>> boring as a statistics "portal".
> 
>>> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
>>> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new

>>> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
>>> weak as their websites.
> 
>> The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly 
>> available information,
> 
> BULLSHIT
> 
>> but decided of it's own accord to do so.
> 
> Nope, because that's what AI does
> 
>> Similarly when it hacked into Hugging Face.
> 
> Nothing to do with your stupid claim about publicly available info
It was supposed to get information by normal means, it didn't, it hacked 
the site. I was not told to do that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74292

Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote
>>> Computer Nerd Kev wrote

>>>>  From OpenAI's statement
>>>> "Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>>>>   The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>>>>   and internal file names."

>>>>  "We notified the organisations and are providing technical
>>>>   information to support their investigations and help address
>>>>   potential security vulnerabilities"

>>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian-  
>>>> government-site-pm-says/107189078
>>>>  "The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and
>>>>   assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting
>>>>   requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.
>>>>    It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any
>>>>   Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view
>>>>   was that this was unlikely."

>>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for-  
>>>> tough-ai-rules/107192992
>>>>  Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
>>>> public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
>>>> public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
>>>> server software).

>>>> In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
>>>> configuration of the website which a human attacker would have
>>>> easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
>>>> boring as a statistics "portal".

>>>> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
>>>> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new

>>>> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
>>>> weak as their websites.

>>> The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly  
>>> available information,

>>  BULLSHIT

>>> but decided of it's own accord to do so.

>>  Nope, because that's what AI does

>>> Similarly when it hacked into Hugging Face.

>>  Nothing to do with your stupid claim about publicly available info

> It was supposed to get information by normal means,

More of your mindless pig ignorant bullshit,
just like your other stupidity about publicly
available info. Nothing like that is true about
using AI to develop new meds etc

> it didn't, it hacked   the site.

Bullshit it did, it decided what that site might be called,
and discovered that that is indeed what it was called,
or found a professional medical researcher telling
someone else about the url of that site

> I was not told to do that.

Bullshit it was if you managed a typo with that first word and meant IT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74293

On Fri, 25 Sep 2026 17:54:45 +1000, Keithr0
<nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote:

>On 25/09/2026 8:57 am, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>  From OpenAI's statement:
>> "Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>>   The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>>   and internal file names."
>> 
>> "We notified the organisations and are providing technical
>>   information to support their investigations and help address
>>   potential security vulnerabilities"
>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian-government-site-pm-says/107189078
>> 
>> "The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and
>>   assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting
>>   requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.
>> 
>>   It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any
>>   Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view
>>   was that this was unlikely."
>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for-tough-ai-rules/107192992
>> 
>> Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
>> public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
>> public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
>> server software).
>> 
>> In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
>> configuration of the website which a human attacker would have
>> easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
>> boring as a statistics "portal".
>> 
>> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
>> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new
>> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
>> weak as their websites.
>> 
>The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly 
>available information, but decided of it's own accord to do so.
>
>Similarly when it hacked into Hugging Face.
>
Regarding  "Hugging Face" AI

The threat is a combination of careless human design and unpredictable
AI behavior. 
Human operators create the vulnerabilities by rushing development or
failing to secure their code, but advanced AI has reached a point
where it can autonomously exploit those human mistakes in ways the
creators never anticipated or intended.

So this again the Genie is out of the bottle, whining about it is not
going to change this aspect from happening from/by countries that have
bad intentions .

 My interest is this fool Albanese. trying to cover up his continuing
idiocy. 
In UN with a massive audience of 14 people, claims he is worried about
AI, he is not he hates social media showing deserved Albanese disgust
<https://x.com/roberts_pa97578> 
just a quick look straight away

Albanese fled Australia when he read his latest achievement
(Destroying a construction company by CGT)!
<https://www.news24.com.au/business/real-estate/major-real-estate-business-bathla-falls-into-administration-owing-lenders-more-than-3-billion/news-story/7c47300d649f32ffc8bb042f1ef657f6>
     https://tinyurl.com/jtxsxa8d   
Major real estate business Bathla falls into administration owing
lenders more than $3 billion

The explicit government assurances
Labor repeatedly and publicly promised no changes to capital gains tax
(CGT) settings or negative gearing:

Albanese Labor
“We have no plans to touch or change negative gearing.”

Before and during the 2025 election, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese
ruled it out multiple times (famously answering “Yes. How hard is it?
For the 50th time” when asked to confirm no changes if re-elected).
Treasurer Jim Chalmers similarly stated the government was not
considering or working on changes to either policy.
This was presented as providing certainty after earlier Labor
platforms (e.g. 2019) had proposed reforms.

These were clear election commitments. Industry participants,
including large-volume developers like Bathla, operated on that basis.
The reversal and the “trap”
In the May 2026 Budget the government broke those commitments,
announcing:

Replacement of the 50% CGT discount with cost-base indexation plus a
30% minimum tax (from July 2027).
Negative gearing limited to new builds (with grandfathering for
existing holdings).

Bathla itself named “impacts from the changes made in the federal
government’s May budget” as one element of the “perfect storm” that
hit sales, confidence, and cash flow. 

The policy shift reduced the attractiveness of established property
investment, contributed to softer buyer demand, and added uncertainty
precisely when the company was heavily leveraged and absorbing higher
construction costs.
The sequence matched a prolonged period of strong price growth and
supply shortage encouraged aggressive expansion (“making hay while the
sun shines”) under explicit policy stability assurances, only for the
sudden change in tax settings to help trigger the market softening
that exposed the high-debt model.

Other factors remained critical — the sheer scale of private-credit
debt (~$3.4 billion), rising costs the group absorbed, and operational
issues

But the broken promise on CGT/negative gearing was a material
contribution
-- 
Petzl

Our Australian commonwealth has survived numerous recessions, one
major depression, and two world wars. 
Doubt if it will survive under a Albanese Labor Government.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74294

Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote
> Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev wrote

>>>  From OpenAI's statement:
>>> "Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>>>   The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>>>   and internal file names."

>>> "We notified the organisations and are providing technical
>>>   information to support their investigations and help address
>>>   potential security vulnerabilities"
>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-australian-government-site-pm-says/107189078

>>> "The government on Thursday launched a taskforce to investigate and
>>>   assess gaps in Australia's existing laws around reporting
>>>   requirements, enforcement, and cyber protections.

>>>   It is also investigating if the OpenAI incident broke any
>>>   Australian laws, though government sources said the initial view
>>>   was that this was unlikely."
>>> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-25/openai-breach-builds-case-for-tough-ai-rules/107192992

>>> Sounds like the AI just guessed some URLs that aren't linked from
>>> public pages, and got to see pages and directories that were really
>>> public in a technical sense anyway (not password protected by the
>>> server software).

>>> In that case it's not really a hack at all - just incompetent
>>> configuration of the website which a human attacker would have
>>> easily found too if they saw a real motive to work on something as
>>> boring as a statistics "portal".

>>> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
>>> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new
>>> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
>>> weak as their websites.

>> The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly
>> available information, but decided of it's own accord to do so.

>> Similarly when it hacked into Hugging Face.

> Regarding  "Hugging Face" AI

> The threat is a combination of careless human design and unpredictable
> AI behavior.

> Human operators create the vulnerabilities by rushing development or
> failing to secure their code, but advanced AI has reached a point
> where it can autonomously exploit those human mistakes in ways the
> creators never anticipated or intended.

> So this again the Genie is out of the bottle,

Nope, perfectly possible to fix the deficiencys
and stop AI hacking other AIs

> whining about it is not
> going to change this aspect from happening from/by countries that have
> bad intentions .

No different to humans doing it

>  My interest is this fool Albanese. trying to cover up his continuing
> idiocy.

The only idiocy is yours

> In UN with a massive audience of 14 people, claims he is worried about
> AI, he is not he hates social media showing deserved Albanese disgust
> <https://x.com/roberts_pa97578>
> just a quick look straight away]

Just because some fool claims something...

> Albanese fled Australia

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken fantsys

> when he read his latest achievement
> (Destroying a construction company by CGT)!
> <https://www.news24.com.au/business/real-estate/major-real-estate-business-bathla-falls-into-administration-owing-lenders-more-than-3-billion/news-story/7c47300d649f32ffc8bb042f1ef657f6>
>      https://tinyurl.com/jtxsxa8d

Nothing to do with Albo, those fucking indians fucked up

> Major real estate business Bathla falls into administration owing
> lenders more than $3 billion

Because those fucking indians fucked up


> The explicit government assurances
> Labor repeatedly and publicly promised no changes to capital gains tax
> (CGT) settings or negative gearing:

> Albanese Labor
> “We have no plans to touch or change negative gearing.”

> Before and during the 2025 election, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese
> ruled it out multiple times (famously answering “Yes. How hard is it?
> For the 50th time” when asked to confirm no changes if re-elected).
> Treasurer Jim Chalmers similarly stated the government was not
> considering or working on changes to either policy.

> This was presented as providing certainty after earlier Labor
> platforms (e.g. 2019) had proposed reforms.

> These were clear election commitments. Industry participants,
> including large-volume developers like Bathla, operated on that basis.
> The reversal and the “trap”

> In the May 2026 Budget the government broke those commitments,
> announcing:

> Replacement of the 50% CGT discount with cost-base indexation plus a
> 30% minimum tax (from July 2027).

> Negative gearing limited to new builds (with grandfathering for
> existing holdings).

That sentance mangles the actual change

> Bathla itself named “impacts from the changes made in the federal
> government’s May budget” as one element of the “perfect storm” that
> hit sales, confidence, and cash flow.

Just more indian bullshit

> The policy shift reduced the attractiveness of established property
> investment,

Bullshit when negative gearing is still fine
for existing propery you keep owning

> contributed to softer buyer demand,

Nothing to do with what collapsed Bathla

> and added uncertainty
> precisely when the company was heavily leveraged and absorbing higher
> construction costs.

Because the contracts stupidly didn't allow for inflation

> The sequence matched a prolonged period of strong price growth and
> supply shortage encouraged aggressive expansion (“making hay while the
> sun shines”) under explicit policy stability assurances, only for the
> sudden change in tax settings to help trigger the market softening
> that exposed the high-debt model.

> Other factors remained critical — the sheer scale of private-credit
> debt (~$3.4 billion),

  That was in fact the real problem

> rising costs the group absorbed, and operational
> issues

Because those fucking indians fucked up;
just like the fucking indian fucked up Wyhalla

> But the broken promise on CGT/negative gearing was a material
> contribution

Bullshit

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74296

In aus.computers Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote:
> On 25/09/2026 8:57 am, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance, which
>> OpenAI highlighted to them, by beating their chest about the new
>> powers of AI and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
>> weak as their websites.
>> 
> The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly 
> available information, but decided of it's own accord to do so.

But it didn't "decide", it just didn't know the difference. It just
knows patterns that get it results. Understanding the ethics of
those patterns would require some real intelligence, which these
AIs so clearly lack. New laws won't change that.

-- 
__          __
#_ < |\| |< _#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74297

Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote
> Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> wrote
>> Computer Nerd Kev wrote

>>> No surprise the government is covering up this incompetance,

There is no incompetance

>>> which   OpenAI highlighted to them,

Bullshit they did

>>> by beating their chest about the new   powers of AI

Didn't happened either

>>> and boasting new regulations that are likely to be as
>>> weak as their websites.

Didn't happened either

>> The point is that the "AI" was not supposed to go beyond publicly
>> available information,

Bullshit, most obviously when proposing new meds

> but decided of it's own accord to do so.

More bullshit

> But it didn't "decide", it just didn't know the difference.

More bullshit

> It just   knows patterns that get it results.

More bullshit

> Understanding the ethics of   those patterns

No ethics involved in working out what url
might be used for aggregate medical statistics
which have no personal details whatever

> would require some real intelligence,

More bullshit

> which these   AIs so clearly lack.

More bullshit

> New laws won't change that.

More bullshit

They certainly can penalise what is illegal

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74299

On 25 Sep 2026 08:57:13 +1000, not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd
Kev) wrote:

>From OpenAI's statement:
>"Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
> The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
> and internal file names."
>

Perhaps insurance companies were involved.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#74301

On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 06:50:27 +1000, Peter Jason <pj@jostle.com> wrote:

>On 25 Sep 2026 08:57:13 +1000, not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd
>Kev) wrote:
>
>>From OpenAI's statement:
>>"Our review found no evidence of patient records being accessed.
>> The information accessed included aggregate health statistics
>> and internal file names."
>>
>
>Perhaps insurance companies were involved.
>
Actually good point. Except the site was open not protected just
statistics, 
But the Chinese use AI to hack, cut cheaper and eisier to pay Labor
Party for secrets
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-27/labor-staffer-tells-icac-he-was-asked-to-count-bag-full-of-cash/11453344
  https://tinyurl.com/4jsrbdzk  
Chinese billionaire allegedly delivered Aldi shopping bag full of
money to Labor HQ, ICAC hears
-- 
Petzl

Our Australian commonwealth has survived numerous recessions, one
major depression, and two world wars. 
Doubt if it will survive under a Albanese Labor Government.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | aus.computers

csiph-web