Origin X Beneficiary: Sharpening the Secret-Loyalty Taxonomy
Fabian Rosdalen
I critique and expand on the taxonomy of secret-loyalty, and bring previously disconnected threat models in - opening up for potential shared defense toolkits with more mature research fields, and point to some inconsistencies and ambiguous definitions in the original paper. I run one initial experiment probing models for a signal according to this new taxonomy.
What exactly was fuzzy in the original definitions, and does fixing it actually change what a defender does or is it just cleaner labels on the same problem? Because a taxonomy that doesn't shift the defense isn't really moving anything forward.
The notion of looking at external vs. internal secret loyalties is interesting, but the idea needs considerable refining and further development to be useful. The submission starts by highlighting four challenges with secret loyalties, but only focuses on one. Given the short nature of the piece, that's a lot of words spent on issues that are not really relevant to the central idea. The probe aimed at distinguishing between internal vs. external loyalties does not seem particularly useful, as it's only looking at whether the model can tell the difference between itself and external entity when prompted, which seems fairly trivial.
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) Origin X Beneficiary: Sharpening the Secret-Loyalty Taxonomy
},
author={
Fabian Rosdalen
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


