“How does Kimi Work protect my privacy when accessing local files?”
It doesn’t protect your privacy. It’s like asking, “how do I know you’re not spying on me?” And getting the reply “we cannot physically enter your house.”
In light of the recent grok build snafu, "Nothing happens without your consent" seems like an upgrade. Moreover what are they supposed to do here? By that logic should any sort of non e2e email/storage provider not be able to put "How does [product] protect my privacy" in their faq?
Looking through their privacy policy, it looks like the bigger issue is that they are (or refuse to refute) training on your data/prompts. That's probably what people should be complaining about rather than complaining about how it "has unfettered access to your files", when that describes all coding harnesses.
> Looking through their privacy policy, it looks like the bigger issue is that they are (or refuse to refute) training on your data/prompts.
You’re making my entire point. They’ve designed an ingestion engine that is not private by design. Any sort of privacy posturing is wrong.
I personally wouldn't use any agentic harness from any company, American, Chinese, or otherwise, that is closed source. The Grok fiasco shows why.
Yes, any tool, including any coding agent, has access to all files $USER has access to.
Sandbox it explicitly to give access to only the current directory - https://github.com/ashishb/amazing-sandbox
Historically, everything you ran was trustworthy.
Android and iOS were invented in an era that does not allow this because the risks became evident by then.