Kamal Ghorui
Canadian computer scientist Yoshua Bengio has raised concerns about the restricted release of Anthropic’s latest AI model, Claude Mythos. Bengio, known for his contributions to deep learning and one of the Godfathers of AI, has argued that the core issue lies in the concentration of decision-making power within a single private company. He said that limiting access to such a system allows one organisation to determine which companies and countries can secure their infrastructure against emerging cyber risks. In an interview with Fortune, Bengio said, “It doesn’t make sense that private individuals are deciding the fate of infrastructure for everyone else. What about all the companies and all the countries that didn’t get access?”His remarks come as Mythos, an AI model capable of identifying thousands of previously unknown “zero-day” vulnerabilities, is being shared selectively with a small group of primarily US-based companies and government entities. Bengio warned that such an approach risks excluding large parts of the global ecosystem from critical cybersecurity protections.Anthropic has justified the limited rollout by citing Mythos’s dual-use nature. While the model can help identify vulnerabilities and strengthen systems, it could also be misused to launch cyberattacks that disrupt critical infrastructure. To manage this risk, the company has opted for a controlled release, initially granting access to select American technology companies whose platforms underpin widely used systems and briefing the US government as it prepares to extend access to federal agencies.However, the move has triggered wider debate about governance and fairness. Several governments and institutions have reportedly sought access to the model to assess vulnerabilities within their own systems. For example, the Bank of England publicly stated that Anthropic had assured UK banks of near-term access. Meanwhile, discussions at the IMF and World Bank spring meetings were dominated by concerns about the model’s ability to expose weaknesses in global financial systems, particularly given that many regulators and companies outside the US have yet to evaluate its findings.
Calls for international oversight of advanced AI models like Anthropic’s Mythos grows
The views of Bengio and others suggest that the scenario calls for greater involvement of more people in AI regulation on an international scale. He has suggested establishing an international authority to regulate the production and use of highly sophisticated AI technology. Bengio feels that the government should impose strict rules and regulations on businesses to prevent misuse of advanced AI technology from affecting other nations’ infrastructure.“There needs to be an agency really in charge of overseeing these kinds of decisions. As the power of AI continues to grow, this question of international commitment becomes pressing. There’s no reason that it’s going to limit itself to attacking US infrastructure or US citizens. So this has to be an international affair,” Bengio added.The debate is also feeding into a broader push for “AI sovereignty,” as countries seek to reduce their dependence on foreign technology providers. Concerns have been amplified by geopolitical tensions and fears that access to critical technologies could be influenced by national interests or policy shifts.The US government is also trying to make sure it can get in. Bloomberg obtained a memo from the White House Office of Management and Budget stating that several federal departments, including the Department of Defence (War), the Treasury, and Homeland Security, will begin using a version of Mythos. This news comes even though Anthropic and the Pentagon are still in a legal fight over earlier supply-chain risk designations.In addition to proprietary platforms such as Mythos, Bengio cautioned about the dangers of using open-source AI models. In general, this type of technology has been seen as advantageous due to its openness and the ability to improve its security through collaboration. However, AI has become advanced enough to search open-source software for vulnerabilities.He also emphasised the importance of including China in any global AI governance framework, given the ongoing race between the U.S. and China in developing advanced AI systems. Although he estimates Chinese models may lag behind US counterparts by a few months, Bengio said the gap does not significantly reduce the associated risks.Bengio’s criticism raises a broader issue: as AI systems get better and more powerful, decisions about how to use them and who can use them affect people around the world. He says that giving those decisions to just one company could leave important parts of the world unprotected and put too much power over important infrastructure in the hands of a few people.
