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. is it just me, or does the a. i. companies’ recent focus on automating exploit finding read as an “engage with us Or Else” ploy against the projects that wouldn’t take generated code contributions but can’t ignore security issues

is it just me, or does the a. i. companies’ recent focus on automating exploit finding read as an “engage with us Or Else” ploy against the projects that wouldn’t take generated code contributions but can’t ignore security issues

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
15 Posts 8 Posters 0 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.
  • tef@mastodon.socialT tef@mastodon.social

    @joe it's more "this is actually a thing it can do" i feel as fuzzing does produce results

    but, well, after the burst of low hanging fruit, i don't expect a regular crop of bugs

    fugueish@wandering.shopF This user is from outside of this forum
    fugueish@wandering.shopF This user is from outside of this forum
    fugueish@wandering.shop
    wrote last edited by
    #3

    @tef @joe They seem to avoid talking about solid defensive remedies (some of which LLMs likely will also be able to do well, such as translation and theorem proving — there are already results), for some reason. Until that strong medicine is applied, I think they'll continue producing new bugs and new kinds of bugs. Underestimating them is unwise for defenders. Keep in mind also they are military contractors.

    tef@mastodon.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • joe@f.duriansoftware.comJ joe@f.duriansoftware.com

      is it just me, or does the a. i. companies’ recent focus on automating exploit finding read as an “engage with us Or Else” ploy against the projects that wouldn’t take generated code contributions but can’t ignore security issues

      aburka@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
      aburka@hachyderm.ioA This user is from outside of this forum
      aburka@hachyderm.io
      wrote last edited by
      #4

      @joe it absolutely comes across as a protection racket

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • joe@f.duriansoftware.comJ joe@f.duriansoftware.com

        is it just me, or does the a. i. companies’ recent focus on automating exploit finding read as an “engage with us Or Else” ploy against the projects that wouldn’t take generated code contributions but can’t ignore security issues

        migratory@jorts.horseM This user is from outside of this forum
        migratory@jorts.horseM This user is from outside of this forum
        migratory@jorts.horse
        wrote last edited by
        #5

        @joe the "we found a local privesc in Linux" seemed particularly silly to tout... we have local privesc in Linux at home

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • fugueish@wandering.shopF fugueish@wandering.shop

          @tef @joe They seem to avoid talking about solid defensive remedies (some of which LLMs likely will also be able to do well, such as translation and theorem proving — there are already results), for some reason. Until that strong medicine is applied, I think they'll continue producing new bugs and new kinds of bugs. Underestimating them is unwise for defenders. Keep in mind also they are military contractors.

          tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
          tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
          tef@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #6

          @fugueish @joe this was true of fuzzing before but i admit it is far more subsidized now

          tef@mastodon.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • tef@mastodon.socialT tef@mastodon.social

            @fugueish @joe this was true of fuzzing before but i admit it is far more subsidized now

            tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
            tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
            tef@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #7

            @fugueish @joe i'm not saying "it doesn't work" but "beware the low hanging fruit giving you false estimates about success rate"

            fugueish@wandering.shopF 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • joe@f.duriansoftware.comJ joe@f.duriansoftware.com

              is it just me, or does the a. i. companies’ recent focus on automating exploit finding read as an “engage with us Or Else” ploy against the projects that wouldn’t take generated code contributions but can’t ignore security issues

              sayrer@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
              sayrer@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
              sayrer@mastodon.social
              wrote last edited by
              #8

              @joe https://gist.github.com/sayrer/659bd4098045164ad9a003df449b6a81

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • tef@mastodon.socialT tef@mastodon.social

                @fugueish @joe i'm not saying "it doesn't work" but "beware the low hanging fruit giving you false estimates about success rate"

                fugueish@wandering.shopF This user is from outside of this forum
                fugueish@wandering.shopF This user is from outside of this forum
                fugueish@wandering.shop
                wrote last edited by
                #9

                @tef @joe I get you, and it's a reasonable note! But also, fuzzers do keep working (and we keep getting surprised all over again when someone makes a fuzzer that can reach a previously unreachable area).

                tef@mastodon.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • fugueish@wandering.shopF fugueish@wandering.shop

                  @tef @joe I get you, and it's a reasonable note! But also, fuzzers do keep working (and we keep getting surprised all over again when someone makes a fuzzer that can reach a previously unreachable area).

                  tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                  tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                  tef@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #10

                  @fugueish @joe alas "they only have to get lucky once, we have to get lucky every time" is as true as it ever was

                  fugueish@wandering.shopF 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • tef@mastodon.socialT tef@mastodon.social

                    @fugueish @joe alas "they only have to get lucky once, we have to get lucky every time" is as true as it ever was

                    fugueish@wandering.shopF This user is from outside of this forum
                    fugueish@wandering.shopF This user is from outside of this forum
                    fugueish@wandering.shop
                    wrote last edited by
                    #11

                    @tef @joe Which is: not fully true! Defenders get to define the territory, including audit and observability. Finding a vuln, developing an exploit — way too easy. Making it operational and maintaining the capability over time: somewhat to substantially more fraught. (Still way, way too easy, of course)

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • joe@f.duriansoftware.comJ joe@f.duriansoftware.com

                      is it just me, or does the a. i. companies’ recent focus on automating exploit finding read as an “engage with us Or Else” ploy against the projects that wouldn’t take generated code contributions but can’t ignore security issues

                      fay59@tech.lgbtF This user is from outside of this forum
                      fay59@tech.lgbtF This user is from outside of this forum
                      fay59@tech.lgbt
                      wrote last edited by
                      #12

                      @joe it’s finding real issues. Anything that finds real issues and costs money will feel like an “engage with us Or Else” situation

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • tef@mastodon.socialT tef@mastodon.social

                        @joe it's more "this is actually a thing it can do" i feel as fuzzing does produce results

                        but, well, after the burst of low hanging fruit, i don't expect a regular crop of bugs

                        pozorvlak@mathstodon.xyzP This user is from outside of this forum
                        pozorvlak@mathstodon.xyzP This user is from outside of this forum
                        pozorvlak@mathstodon.xyz
                        wrote last edited by
                        #13

                        @tef @joe sure, but *every* new analysis technique finds a whole bunch of bugs at first and then levels off after a while. That said, I'm genuinely impressed at some of the things they've found - a 27yo 0day in OpenBSD? Wild.

                        tef@mastodon.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • pozorvlak@mathstodon.xyzP pozorvlak@mathstodon.xyz

                          @tef @joe sure, but *every* new analysis technique finds a whole bunch of bugs at first and then levels off after a while. That said, I'm genuinely impressed at some of the things they've found - a 27yo 0day in OpenBSD? Wild.

                          tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                          tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                          tef@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #14

                          @pozorvlak @joe alas, "secure programing in C" turns out to be more than just yelling at linux developers

                          tef@mastodon.socialT 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • tef@mastodon.socialT tef@mastodon.social

                            @pozorvlak @joe alas, "secure programing in C" turns out to be more than just yelling at linux developers

                            tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                            tef@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                            tef@mastodon.social
                            wrote last edited by
                            #15

                            @pozorvlak @joe

                            to be clear, if you believe openbsd has a lower defect rather than any other of the bsds, you're absolutely being taken for a ride

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                            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