Bank of America has had to spend big on IT in response to an AI security audit and findings that its anti-money-laundering (AML) controls were lacking.

The bank was fined a whopping $1.2 billion for money laundering offences this week, after banking authorities identified a lax attitude to compliance.

“We understand the seriousness of compliance, and we are responsible for getting it right,” Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan said on a conference call to discuss the company’s third-quarter financial results. “We have invested billions of dollars in technology and dedicated thousands of employees to combat financial crime,” he said, adding that “a couple hundred million” of that spending in the third quarter was on “remediation for the AML”.

The IT team had to spend a similar amount on fixing software vulnerabilities in its systems, a task that also required it to hire 1,000 consultants, Moynihan said.

The bank’s security vulnerabilities were revealed after the company received an early release of Claude Mythos Preview. In a report to the US House of Representatives Financial Services Committee, Anthropic said that Claude Mythos Preview “has already found thousands of high-severity vulnerabilities, including some in every major operating system and web browser.”

This article first appeared on CSO.

Current security procedures for training AI models are inadequate, hundreds of AI researchers have warned governments and the AI community. They are calling for tougher rules and the establishment of a new international body overseeing best practice for AI development.

In an open letter the AI specialists — 487, at time of publication, including many senior academics — called for more AI safety research and greater emphasis on containment technologies.

“Strong sandboxing mechanisms including air-gapping (disconnecting from the internet) should be used to provide high-assurance containment of cyber-capable AI models,” say the signatories, who include such luminaries as Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio.

The experts said that a new international body, to be set up in consultation with governments and a wide range of AI and security specialists, could set new safety standards but also act as an organization to which containment failures could be reported, improving transparency for learning and accountability purposes.

The scientists’ demands go further than some recent calls for greater regulation of AI. Earlier this week, Microsoft president Brad Smith said AI is less regulated than washing machines or milk, although he made no firm proposals to rectify the situation. And the UK parliament is looking at ways to improve AI security, although any moves will be hampered by disagreement among AI businesses. 

Hinton and Bengio are no strangers to this kind of scientist-led initiative. In October last year, they signed an open letter warning of the dangers of developing super-intelligent AI. The letter appears not to have affected AI’s breakneck development; it remains to be seen whether AI players in boardrooms will heed the warning.

This article first appeared on CSO.