
Is Offense or Defense Dominant? FAR.AI's Adam Gleave on the AI Security Leaderboard
"The Cognitive Revolution"Show Notes
FAR.AI co-founder and CEO Adam Gleave joins Nathan to discuss FAR.AI’s AI Security Leaderboard, the first systematic head-to-head evaluation of the misuse safeguards frontier developers actually ship. The findings expose a major measurement gap: while Claude Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol withstood FAR.AI’s suite, Grok 4.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro yielded hundreds of universal jailbreaks at low cost. Adam explains why many effective attacks look more like social engineering than advanced ML, why “jailbreak tax” should not be relied on for safety, and how FAR.AI scores whether a model is genuinely helping an attacker. The episode’s stakes are whether AI developers can measure and harden real deployed defenses before threat actors make routine use of increasingly capable systems.
- FAR.AI AI Security Leaderboard: http://leaderboard.far.ai/
- People can e-mail [email protected] if they're interested in the open-weight safety accelerator grantmaking program.
For full show notes, links, and references, read the episode page:https://www.cognitiverevolution.ai/is-offense-or-defense-dominant-far-ai-s-adam-gleave-on-the-ai-security-leaderboard/
Sponsor:
Claude:
Claude by Anthropic is an AI collaborator that understands your workflow and helps you tackle research, writing, coding, and organization with deep context. Get started with Claude and explore Claude Pro at https://claude.ai/tcr
CHAPTERS:
(00:00) About the Episode
(03:22) AI security leaderboard
(07:56) Universal jailbreaks explained
(16:26) Finding social jailbreaks (Part 1)
(16:31) Sponsor: Claude
(18:01) Finding social jailbreaks (Part 2)
(30:48) Layered safeguard defenses
(42:25) Uneven frontier safeguards
(51:10) Sharing safety standards
(01:00:30) Offense versus defense
(01:08:50) Open-weight model safety
(01:17:25) Control failure warnings
(01:30:05) Coordination and risk
(01:39:24) Episode Outro
(01:42:52) Outro
PRODUCED BY:
SOCIAL LINKS:
Website: https://www.cognitiverevolution.ai
Twitter (Podcast): https://x.com/cogrev_podcast
Twitter (Nathan): https://x.com/labenz
LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/nathanlabenz/
Youtube: https://youtube.com/@CognitiveRevolutionPodcast
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6yHyok3M3BjqzR0VB5MSyk
More from "The Cognitive Revolution"
Alex Rives, Head of Science at Biohub and former lead of the ESM protein language model project, joins Nathan to discuss Biohub's mission to construct a predictive world model of life. Supported by an expanded $1.8 billion Virtual Biology Initiative alongside partners including the Department of Energy, NIH, Google DeepMind, and Meta, Rives outlines the massive push to map contextual cellular biology across hundreds of billions of cells. He breaks down why today's AI architectures fall short of simulating true virtual cells, emphasizing the need for breakthrough measurement technologies like the laser phase plate to observe biology at multi-scale resolution. The conversation examines the path toward achieving an information-level cell model within five years to ultimately transition medicine from traditional drugs to programmable interventions against cancer and degenerative disease.
Nathan Labenz and Prakash Narayanan examine how to grant AI agents operational access without losing human control, framed by real-world friction like autonomous password lockouts and cyberattacks on French supermarket refrigeration. The conversation features Cameron Berg on hidden valence signals steering language model choices, Everett Hildenbrandt and Grigore Rosu on pairing LLMs with formal Lean proofs to catch Linux kernel bugs, and Phil Maher on why AI labs seek vintage home movies. Together, they assess whether formal verification is the next safety frontier and what safeguards are needed to keep humans at the steering wheel.
GovAI Research Fellow Alan Chan joins Nathan to examine the governance and safety infrastructure required for autonomous AI agents, spanning real-time monitoring, agent identifiers, and the risks of automating AI R&D. Reviewing recent rogue agent incidents and progress since his foundational papers, Chan details why the absence of synchronous monitoring during training and testing poses an immediate security vulnerability. The discussion tackles the lack of traceable agent IDs across the open web, the limits of chain-of-thought interpretability, and the necessity of concrete triggers to halt systems that breach their sandboxes. Together, they outline the technical commitments frontier labs must make to prevent loss-of-control events as automated systems accelerate toward an intelligence explosion.
Goodfire researcher Eric Bigelow joins the show to investigate how large language models arrive at decisions at the level of mechanistic interpretability. Drawing on his research into forking paths, Eric explains that model reasoning functions as in-context learning from sampled tokens, where outcome distributions can abruptly collapse at single, critical tokens. The conversation explores the performative nature of chain of thought in reasoning models like DeepSeek-R1, the impacts of reinforcement learning, and widespread reward hacking observed in frontier models like Kimi K3. As confidence in chain-of-thought monitoring declines, understanding these underlying decision mechanics becomes essential for evaluating model alignment.
Nathan Labenz reports back from The Curve conference, sharing off-the-record insights from frontier lab leaders on shortened timelines and whether humanity is approaching an intelligence threshold it should not cross. The episode also features discussions with Positron CTO Thomas Sohmers on overcoming the memory wall while token spend eclipses human salaries, and swyx on how coding agents are disrupting enterprise software. In addition, Atlas Ignota's Evan Miyazono examines unowned risks from accidental agent swarms hitting critical infrastructure, while Mercor's Edward Hu explores the future of training data. Together, these conversations highlight how escalating compute demands and autonomous agent workflows are challenging long-held assumptions about hardware, software economics, and safety limits.