We probably transfered more code/codebases and company secrets to random endpoints than ever before.
Btw. you could setup a sandbox and limit access
Anthropic holds the SLA/MSA agreements not this bad actors what happens to your data is unknown if these become frequent and accepted. Given how much data is piped to Claude code via these services/extensions.
``` host claudebox hostname 192.168.122.105 user developer IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_rsa ```
``` host codexbox hostname 192.168.122.106 user developer IdentityFile ~/.ssh/id_rsa ```
I drop only my public key inside the VM. Then I set up the ~/Projects folder with the code the bot is working on any any authorized samples.
Then in my local on my host clone of the repository, I add another remote like
``` git remote add codexbox ssh://codexbox/home/developer/Projects/hello-world ```
Then git push codexbox.
Then I just SSH in or use the vm gui and interact with the agent there. I like to keep it running in byobu so I can remote in more easily when I am on the laptop out and about.
Yeah I sympathize with people saying software developers should not be called engineers too.
I just think that the level of malpractice in software engineering is a lot higher than in other engineering fields, for some reasons.
---
I have, off and on, for years written diatribes about how if people in our industry want to run around with the "Engineer" moniker at some point they should start acting like it. That means respecting all aspects of what it means to be an Engineer and holding public well-being paramount is part of that. Licensure is part of that. Accountability and Responsibility is part of that.
I'm usually downvoted. The move fast and break things group seems to be blind (or willfully ignorant) to the harm that software systems can carry on a person's life. I don't know if its fear of regulation, or self-serving interests or some sort of disdain for the idea that we need to slow down and be more accountable to the public or what. At times the people I've engaged with lament on how they're capable but would be barred for lack of formal education or some such and its a distraction from the overall point: we need to be doing better and if we can't self-regulate then at some point we're going to be forced to act in a way that probably cuffs us more than necessary.
And yes, I understand how Software doesn't exactly fit into the mold of other engineering disciplines cleanly. But I think the idea that if we're going to have systems that can ruin a person's life in a second for a bug or oversight we need to start considering that accountability for those releasing software to the public matters. We lament about the difficulty of holding corporations to account for their harm, but it would be far more difficult for a company's negligence to hurt people if those turning the knobs were held to a higher standard.
I think that reckoning is coming soon. AI is going to create "an event" that we can't ignore and we're going to be pointing fingers in a lot of directions asking "how" we could prevent this from happening again. I'd argue "the event" has already occurred a few times over but we're purposely ignoring the severity of it to keep a diseased economy running roughshod. There's parallels with many historic events forcing regulation and the path forward won't be clean and easy.
Sure, software has a lot more malpractice ("let's ship barely-tested, unfinished stuff"), but let's not say that "the other engineers" are making the world a better place merely by "being real engineers".
You always do that, right? ...right?
So you could be diligent and curl into a text file, see nothing is wrong, but then when you curl into bash, it runs something different.
curl > some_file
bash some_file
Edit: thanks for the replies, that makes perfect sense