DeepSeek banned from U.S. federal civilian agencies under new DHS order

(public-inspection.federalregister.gov)

21 points | by cmrdporcupine 4 hours ago

4 comments

  • gavinray 4 hours ago
    Here's the transcription of the reasoning:

      > Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Basic Technology Research Co., Ltd. (hereinafter DeepSeek), a foreign, privately-owned company, located in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) provides multiple artificial intelligence applications available widely and free of charge. DeepSeek’s models present multiple threat vectors. DeepSeek servers are located in the PRC, and the PRC legal system permits extensive authority to government cyber and intelligence functions to access private company infrastructure. For DeepSeek-hosted instances of their models, DeepSeek’s account generation process collects personally identifiable information (PII) and may also track and digitally fingerprint users. DeepSeek’s most widely used applications function through a prompt-and-response process that requires presenting information to the model, and which may result in the transfer of sensitive data to the PRC if used by U.S. government employees or vendors. The transfer of the aforementioned information to the PRC, either independently or in combination with publicly available data, could produce actionable intelligence on U.S. persons and/or government programs. The models themselves may contain malware or other security vulnerabilities. Indeed, open-source security research has found that the DeepSeek iOS mobile application contains multiple critical vulnerabilities.
    • cmrdporcupine 4 hours ago
      Thing is, is it seems to say a ban on use even when the weights are hosted via other providers.

      "third-party products and services developed using DeepSeek implementations"

      So you could be hosting it fully locally inside the agency and still it would be banned.

      It's not surprising to me, but it's pretty blunt. Not that I care what US agencies do, but this does seem like the first step of many to come.

      • tmp10423288442 2 hours ago
        If I were the US government, I wouldn't trust the alignment/RLHF of a model developed by an adversary if I had the choice. Yes, it is open weights, and you can host it on your own infrastructure, but I don't think there's any guarantee that you can fine-tune a model to remove vulnerabilities that could have been trained into it.

        I realize that non-US nations could ask the same about the US. All I will say is that there are consequences to failing to nurture a competitive tech industry - even Mistral is basing their newest models on China open-weights models. Unlike the EU, the US government is fortunate to have a choice.

  • jacquesm 1 hour ago
    The models may well contain malware or security vulnerabilities. But they are at least open to inspection because the weights are available, the same can not be said about US providers of inference such as OpenAI and Anthropic.
    • cmrdporcupine 1 hour ago
      It's also odd for them to single out DeepSeek in particular, and not just any model from the PRC?
      • jacquesm 1 hour ago
        DeepSeek is the one that is the most visible, and probably the most cited in the departure messages to US providers.
  • sciencesama 25 minutes ago
    how can an open source model be banned ?
    • GlickWick 18 minutes ago
      Easily? Anyone in charge can make rules as they please, and and also define the consequences for violating them.
  • johnnyApplePRNG 2 hours ago
    Deepseek V4.1 Flash 1017 is out of this world good ... and cheap ... that's why.
    • GlickWick 17 minutes ago
      That's not why.

      We've entered a pretty adversarial era, and we know there are unexpected attack vectors available in frontier models. Just because you an inspect the weights doesn't mean you can derive the behavior.

      I suspect the CCP would ban US models if they didn't need to distill them to make their own.