“A team at Microsoft says it used artificial intelligence to discover a “zero day” vulnerability in the biosecurity systems used to prevent the misuse of DNA.
These screening systems are designed to stop people from purchasing genetic sequences that could be used to create deadly toxins or pathogens. But now researchers led by Microsoft’s chief scientist, Eric Horvitz, say they have figured out how to bypass the protections in a way previously unknown to defenders.
Horvitz and his team focused on generative AI algorithms that propose new protein shapes. These types of programs are already fueling the hunt for new drugs at well-funded startups like Generate Biomedicines and Isomorphic Labs, a spinout of Google.
The problem is that such systems are potentially “dual use.” They can use their training sets to generate both beneficial molecules and harmful ones.
Microsoft says it began a “red-teaming” test of AI’s dual-use potential in 2023 in order to determine whether “adversarial AI protein design” could help bioterrorists manufacture harmful proteins.
The safeguard that Microsoft attacked is what’s known as biosecurity screening software. To manufacture a protein, researchers typically need to order a corresponding DNA sequence from a commercial vendor, which they can then install in a cell. Those vendors use screening software to compare incoming orders with known toxins or pathogens. A close match will set off an alert.
To design its attack, Microsoft used several generative protein models (including its own, called EvoDiff) to redesign toxins—changing their structure in a way that let them slip past screening software but was predicted to keep their deadly function intact.
Before publishing the results, Microsoft says, it alerted the US government and software makers, who’ve already patched their systems, although some AI-designed molecules can still escape detection.
“The patch is incomplete, and the state of the art is changing. But this isn’t a one-and-done thing. It’s the start of even more testing,” … “We’re in something of an arms race.”
“This finding, combined with rapid advances in AI-enabled biological modeling, demonstrates the clear and urgent need for enhanced nucleic acid synthesis screening procedures coupled with a reliable enforcement and verification mechanism,” says Dean Ball, a fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation.
Ball notes that the US government already considers screening of DNA orders a key line of security. Last May, in an executive order on biological research safety, President Trump called for an overall revamp of that system, although so far the White House hasn’t released new recommendations.
Others doubt that commercial DNA synthesis is the best point of defense against bad actors. Michael Cohen, an AI-safety researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, believes there will always be ways to disguise sequences and that Microsoft could have made its test harder.
“The challenge appears weak, and their patched tools fail a lot,” says Cohen. “There seems to be an unwillingness to admit that sometime soon, we’re going to have to retreat from this supposed choke point, so we should start looking around for ground that we can actually hold.”
Manos_Of_Fate on
Yet another reason on the pile that we shouldn’t just dump countless billions into inventing a new technology simply because it’s possible. We need to be considering the ethical and safety concerns of new technologies *before* we create them, not after.
Kukulkan9 on
How bout microsoft focus on making their OS better instead of shittier before it delves into biology ?
whybutwhythat on
Most are only focusing on the positive things, but there will be far more negative things it will be able to produce by bad actors. This is why everything will be locked down anyway, no matter what that looks like on the other side.
OnlineParacosm on
They’re creating enough “zero days” already with AD
5 Comments
“A team at Microsoft says it used artificial intelligence to discover a “zero day” vulnerability in the biosecurity systems used to prevent the misuse of DNA.
These screening systems are designed to stop people from purchasing genetic sequences that could be used to create deadly toxins or pathogens. But now researchers led by Microsoft’s chief scientist, Eric Horvitz, say they have figured out how to bypass the protections in a way previously unknown to defenders.
Horvitz and his team focused on generative AI algorithms that propose new protein shapes. These types of programs are already fueling the hunt for new drugs at well-funded startups like Generate Biomedicines and Isomorphic Labs, a spinout of Google.
The problem is that such systems are potentially “dual use.” They can use their training sets to generate both beneficial molecules and harmful ones.
Microsoft says it began a “red-teaming” test of AI’s dual-use potential in 2023 in order to determine whether “adversarial AI protein design” could help bioterrorists manufacture harmful proteins.
The safeguard that Microsoft attacked is what’s known as biosecurity screening software. To manufacture a protein, researchers typically need to order a corresponding DNA sequence from a commercial vendor, which they can then install in a cell. Those vendors use screening software to compare incoming orders with known toxins or pathogens. A close match will set off an alert.
To design its attack, Microsoft used several generative protein models (including its own, called EvoDiff) to redesign toxins—changing their structure in a way that let them slip past screening software but was predicted to keep their deadly function intact.
Before publishing the results, Microsoft says, it alerted the US government and software makers, who’ve already patched their systems, although some AI-designed molecules can still escape detection.
“The patch is incomplete, and the state of the art is changing. But this isn’t a one-and-done thing. It’s the start of even more testing,” … “We’re in something of an arms race.”
“This finding, combined with rapid advances in AI-enabled biological modeling, demonstrates the clear and urgent need for enhanced nucleic acid synthesis screening procedures coupled with a reliable enforcement and verification mechanism,” says Dean Ball, a fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation.
Ball notes that the US government already considers screening of DNA orders a key line of security. Last May, in an executive order on biological research safety, President Trump called for an overall revamp of that system, although so far the White House hasn’t released new recommendations.
Others doubt that commercial DNA synthesis is the best point of defense against bad actors. Michael Cohen, an AI-safety researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, believes there will always be ways to disguise sequences and that Microsoft could have made its test harder.
“The challenge appears weak, and their patched tools fail a lot,” says Cohen. “There seems to be an unwillingness to admit that sometime soon, we’re going to have to retreat from this supposed choke point, so we should start looking around for ground that we can actually hold.”
Yet another reason on the pile that we shouldn’t just dump countless billions into inventing a new technology simply because it’s possible. We need to be considering the ethical and safety concerns of new technologies *before* we create them, not after.
How bout microsoft focus on making their OS better instead of shittier before it delves into biology ?
Most are only focusing on the positive things, but there will be far more negative things it will be able to produce by bad actors. This is why everything will be locked down anyway, no matter what that looks like on the other side.
They’re creating enough “zero days” already with AD