Simon Willison’s Weblog: Musing about OAuth and LLMs on Mastodon

Source URL: https://simonwillison.net/2024/Aug/24/oauth-llms/#atom-everything
Source: Simon Willison’s Weblog
Title: Musing about OAuth and LLMs on Mastodon

Feedly Summary: Musing about OAuth and LLMs on Mastodon
Lots of people are asking why Anthropic and OpenAI don’t support OAuth, so you can bounce users through those providers to get a token that uses their API budget for your app.
My guess: they’re worried malicious app developers would use it to trick people and obtain valid API keys.
Imagine a version of my dumb little write a haiku about a photo you take page which used OAuth, harvested API keys and then racked up hundreds of dollar bills against everyone who tried it out running illicit election interference campaigns or whatever.
I’m trying to think of an OAuth API that dishes out tokens which effectively let you spend money on behalf of your users and I can’t think of any – OAuth is great for “grant this app access to data that I want to share", but "spend money on my behalf" is a whole other ball game.
I guess there’s a version of this that could work: it’s OAuth but users get to set a spending limit of e.g. $1 (maybe with the authenticating app suggesting what that limit should be).
Tags: openai, anthropic, llms, oauth

AI Summary and Description: Yes

Summary: The discussion centers on the concerns from developers about the absence of OAuth support from AI platforms like Anthropic and OpenAI. It highlights the potential risks of malicious applications exploiting OAuth to misuse API keys and incur costs unknowingly on behalf of users. This raises important considerations for API security and access management within AI applications.

Detailed Description: This text provides an analysis of the complexities surrounding OAuth implementation in the context of large language models (LLMs) and their APIs. Key points of discussion include:

– **OAuth Concerns**: The author contemplates why major AI providers have not adopted OAuth for facilitating API access. The notable concern is that malicious developers could exploit OAuth implementations to obtain valid API keys, allowing them to incur costs through users’ accounts without their knowledge or consent.

– **Implications for Security**: The risk of tricking users into giving up API access through malicious apps is significant; this could lead to unauthorized spending and potential misuse that might have broader implications, such as election interference.

– **API Spending Authorization**: The difficulty in developing an OAuth model that allows spending money on behalf of users is emphasized. Traditional OAuth primarily focuses on data access rather than financial transactions, making this a unique challenge in the context of LLMs.

– **Suggestions for Mitigation**: The author proposes the idea that if OAuth were to allow financial transactions, it could include mechanisms such as spending limits set by users. This introduces a promising avenue for balancing accessibility with security.

Key Takeaways:
– OAuth’s role in securing API keys is critically important, particularly for applications interacting with LLMs.
– The potential for unauthorized financial activities underscores the need for enhanced API security measures.
– There is a growing need for mechanisms that address spending limits and user control over financial transactions in OAuth and other API structures.

For professionals in the fields of AI, cloud security, and infrastructure, this discussion is a timely reminder of the interplay between user authentication mechanisms and the financial implications tied to API utilization, particularly for emerging technologies in the AI space.