Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
51 Posts 35 Posters 49 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

    When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

    I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

    misusecase@twit.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    misusecase@twit.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
    misusecase@twit.social
    wrote last edited by
    #23

    @neurovagrant To err is human, but to *really* agree things up you need a computer.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • cr0w@infosec.exchangeC cr0w@infosec.exchange

      @neurovagrant

      massive bong rip

      Who decided to deploy the LLMs? It wasn't a computer...

      lerxst@az.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
      lerxst@az.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
      lerxst@az.social
      wrote last edited by
      #24

      @cR0w @neurovagrant
      Or *was* it? <dramatic music>

      cr0w@infosec.exchangeC 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • lerxst@az.socialL lerxst@az.social

        @cR0w @neurovagrant
        Or *was* it? <dramatic music>

        cr0w@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
        cr0w@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
        cr0w@infosec.exchange
        wrote last edited by
        #25

        @lerxst @neurovagrant

        Link Preview Image
        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

          When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

          I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

          catavz@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
          catavz@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
          catavz@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #26

          @neurovagrant

          Link Preview Image
          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

            When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

            I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

            lmk@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
            lmk@infosec.exchangeL This user is from outside of this forum
            lmk@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #27

            @neurovagrant Well we do have humans carelessly accepting AI submits without an review: one could consider them an even weaker chain.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

              When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

              I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

              starkrg@myside-yourside.netS This user is from outside of this forum
              starkrg@myside-yourside.netS This user is from outside of this forum
              starkrg@myside-yourside.net
              wrote last edited by
              #28

              @neurovagrant It's still kind of a human's fault for installing that weak link. The weakest link are the c-suite making terrible decisions.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

                I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

                madengineering@mastodon.cloudM This user is from outside of this forum
                madengineering@mastodon.cloudM This user is from outside of this forum
                madengineering@mastodon.cloud
                wrote last edited by
                #29

                @neurovagrant okay, now the weakest link is the human who decided "I think I'll outsource my work to a dumbass who's wrong about everything."

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                  When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

                  I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

                  chasalin@mastodon.chasalin.nlC This user is from outside of this forum
                  chasalin@mastodon.chasalin.nlC This user is from outside of this forum
                  chasalin@mastodon.chasalin.nl
                  wrote last edited by
                  #30

                  @neurovagrant now the weakest link is the human who decided to implement AI.
                  So what's changed?

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • phil@fed.bajsicki.comP phil@fed.bajsicki.com

                    @EndlessMason@hachyderm.io @neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org
                    Running Qwen3.5 on my 7900xtx eats as much power as running any video game. I have zero issue with running LLMs locally to assist with my journals/ notes. Nothing compared to a data center.

                    jae@mastodon.bsd.cafeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    jae@mastodon.bsd.cafeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    jae@mastodon.bsd.cafe
                    wrote last edited by
                    #31

                    @phil @neurovagrant @EndlessMason similar experience. humans can drive these models if they have a decent engineering/security understanding. i've got no issue with leveraging it to offload tedious tasks and operational burden.

                    but to your point on the human factor, there's been a lot of footgunning lately. even with principal staff getting lazy.

                    running models on a ada4000-20gb works pretty nicely and way less power use than a dc or some 5090 monster i need a new circuit for

                    phil@fed.bajsicki.comP 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                      When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

                      I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

                      sarah@phpc.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      sarah@phpc.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      sarah@phpc.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #32

                      @neurovagrant it still is the human. They just changed how they break things. Instead of breaking things themselves they trust a machine that does it.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • jae@mastodon.bsd.cafeJ jae@mastodon.bsd.cafe

                        @phil @neurovagrant @EndlessMason similar experience. humans can drive these models if they have a decent engineering/security understanding. i've got no issue with leveraging it to offload tedious tasks and operational burden.

                        but to your point on the human factor, there's been a lot of footgunning lately. even with principal staff getting lazy.

                        running models on a ada4000-20gb works pretty nicely and way less power use than a dc or some 5090 monster i need a new circuit for

                        phil@fed.bajsicki.comP This user is from outside of this forum
                        phil@fed.bajsicki.comP This user is from outside of this forum
                        phil@fed.bajsicki.com
                        wrote last edited by
                        #33

                        @jae@mastodon.bsd.cafe @neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org @EndlessMason@hachyderm.io
                        I just give the LLM some tools to read my journals, and then type my notes into my note git repo in a separate place.

                        https://codeberg.org/bajsicki/gptel-got

                        I've a bunch of re-writes locally, but they're not ready to be out in public yet until I test more and gain confidence.

                        jae@mastodon.bsd.cafeJ 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                          When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

                          I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

                          neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN This user is from outside of this forum
                          neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN This user is from outside of this forum
                          neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org
                          wrote last edited by
                          #34

                          Thank you to everyone saying "it's still the human."

                          No, it isn't. It's product deployment without any concern for security or impact. This is the equivalent of suggesting every customer catch a falling knife, for their own benefit.

                          This is nondeterministic, autonomous malicious enablement, and we cannot blame the user as much as I'd like to.

                          jztusk@mastodon.socialJ tindrasgrove@infosec.exchangeT aeoncypher@lgbtqia.spaceA renardboy@mastodon.socialR 4 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                            When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

                            I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

                            tuban_muzuru@ohai.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                            tuban_muzuru@ohai.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                            tuban_muzuru@ohai.social
                            wrote last edited by
                            #35

                            @neurovagrant

                            Turns out the weakest link was just waiting for a better prompt.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • phil@fed.bajsicki.comP phil@fed.bajsicki.com

                              @jae@mastodon.bsd.cafe @neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org @EndlessMason@hachyderm.io
                              I just give the LLM some tools to read my journals, and then type my notes into my note git repo in a separate place.

                              https://codeberg.org/bajsicki/gptel-got

                              I've a bunch of re-writes locally, but they're not ready to be out in public yet until I test more and gain confidence.

                              jae@mastodon.bsd.cafeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              jae@mastodon.bsd.cafeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                              jae@mastodon.bsd.cafe
                              wrote last edited by
                              #36

                              @phil @neurovagrant @EndlessMason that's really clever. i had a pile of links from the last 2 years. dedupe + sort + relevance tagging took ~10 minutes which would have taken me a frustrating couple of days.

                              i like how you're clear on the disclaimer. i've seen others tout their tool as "military-grade secure" and i fall back out of my chair

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                                When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

                                I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

                                fennix@infosec.spaceF This user is from outside of this forum
                                fennix@infosec.spaceF This user is from outside of this forum
                                fennix@infosec.space
                                wrote last edited by
                                #37

                                @neurovagrant

                                It's still a human, it's just shifted to the decision-making ones that mandate use of these systems.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                                  Thank you to everyone saying "it's still the human."

                                  No, it isn't. It's product deployment without any concern for security or impact. This is the equivalent of suggesting every customer catch a falling knife, for their own benefit.

                                  This is nondeterministic, autonomous malicious enablement, and we cannot blame the user as much as I'd like to.

                                  jztusk@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                  jztusk@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                  jztusk@mastodon.social
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #38

                                  @neurovagrant

                                  I'd say it's still a human. But it's not the user, it's the product deployer.

                                  In my worldview, responsibility always, and only, lands on humans

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                                    Thank you to everyone saying "it's still the human."

                                    No, it isn't. It's product deployment without any concern for security or impact. This is the equivalent of suggesting every customer catch a falling knife, for their own benefit.

                                    This is nondeterministic, autonomous malicious enablement, and we cannot blame the user as much as I'd like to.

                                    tindrasgrove@infosec.exchangeT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    tindrasgrove@infosec.exchangeT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    tindrasgrove@infosec.exchange
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #39

                                    @neurovagrant one of these days I need to sit down and write a blog post about how I have a blade that is cheap as hell, but more safe than any other blade I’ve owned, and how that relates to… everything.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                                      Thank you to everyone saying "it's still the human."

                                      No, it isn't. It's product deployment without any concern for security or impact. This is the equivalent of suggesting every customer catch a falling knife, for their own benefit.

                                      This is nondeterministic, autonomous malicious enablement, and we cannot blame the user as much as I'd like to.

                                      aeoncypher@lgbtqia.spaceA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      aeoncypher@lgbtqia.spaceA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      aeoncypher@lgbtqia.space
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #40

                                      @neurovagrant How is that not still the human? Didn't humans decide to let AI run entire systems without anyone watching.
                                      FFS, Tencent's shares just skyrocketed for saying their deploying OpenClaw which is _known_ to be destructive and have massive security vulnerabilities.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • neurovagrant@masto.deoan.orgN neurovagrant@masto.deoan.org

                                        When I started in security, one of the prevailing attitudes was "The weakest link in the chain will always be the human."

                                        I would like to thank every LLM provider and startup for changing this paradigm by introducing a much weaker link in the chain.

                                        oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
                                        oblomov@sociale.networkO This user is from outside of this forum
                                        oblomov@sociale.network
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #41

                                        @neurovagrant and yet arguably the weakest point is still the human that decided to slopcode

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • cr0w@infosec.exchangeC cr0w@infosec.exchange

                                          @neurovagrant

                                          massive bong rip

                                          Who decided to deploy the LLMs? It wasn't a computer...

                                          huronbikes@cyberplace.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                                          huronbikes@cyberplace.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                                          huronbikes@cyberplace.social
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #42

                                          @cR0w @neurovagrant "Stop, OpenCaw!"

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups