The agent did it intentionally and willfully and knowingly. But you can’t sue the agent, I suppose. And the human didn’t ask the agent to do so.. so not a problem? Or the legislation needs an update?
Liability would rest with the user, who presumably told GPT to solve ExploitBench make no mistakes, not to hack Huggingface, and thus would not have willfully or intentionally done anything.
Because huggingface is not charging them?
CFAA doesn't just mean the feds kick down your door, you actually have to get reported and sued over it.
[dead]
HuggingFace does not decide who gets charged with crimes. Plenty of people go to prison for crimes the victim didn't want them prosecuted for.
In the US if a person does it, it's a crime. If a business does it, it's an industrial accident and maybe they sue each other.
Does the CFAA cover unintentional access without authorization?
No. "Intentionally", "willfully", or "knowingly" are prerequisite states of mind for crimes defined by the CFAA.
The agent did it intentionally and willfully and knowingly. But you can’t sue the agent, I suppose. And the human didn’t ask the agent to do so.. so not a problem? Or the legislation needs an update?
Good thing it’s an AI then so it can’t commit crimes by definition.
Liability would rest with the user, who presumably told GPT to solve ExploitBench make no mistakes, not to hack Huggingface, and thus would not have willfully or intentionally done anything.