This is recklessly negligent and I would personally not tolerate a coworker or report doing it. What's next, sending long-lived access tokens out over email and asking pretty please for nobody to cc/forward?
This is recklessly negligent and I would personally not tolerate a coworker or report doing it. What's next, sending long-lived access tokens out over email and asking pretty please for nobody to cc/forward?
My broader point is that LLMs are going to need access to these keys whether we like it or not, and until we get extremely scoped API permissions (which would make a ton of sense, but most services aren't there), you have to live a bit on the edge to move quickly.
Mitigation is good, but what's preventing your sudo-privileged LLM from disabling/corrupting/deleting on-site backups either directly or by proxy via access to the DB and code that writes to it?
In the future, I could see this solved by the same "nuclear launch key" style delegation of keys. Aka in order to run certain API or database commands, the service requires both the standard dev key (presumably used by the LLM) and a separate "human admin key" that gets requested whenever a specific operation is requested. It could be tied to a biometric request or something as well to avoid the LLM hacking its way around it. Honestly this is pretty out of my technical depth but just thinking out-loud.
And, a lot of DevOps/SecOps at scale is concerned with mitigating potential rogue or dangerously incompetent employees. You don't let your juniors push senior-unreviewed code, much less let them anywhere near the keys to kingdom if you can help it.