77
ChatGPT o3 found a Linux Kernel vulnerability. "The future" has an 8% success rate, and a 28% chance of false positives. (sean.heelan.io)
submitted 1 year ago* by to c/techtakes@awful.systems
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This blog post has been reported on and distorted by a lot of tech news sites using it to wax delusional about AI's future role in vulnerability detection.

But they all gloss over the critical bit: in fairly ideal circumstances where the AI was being directed to the vuln, it had only an 8% success rate, and a whopping 28% false positive rate!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

He did fuzzing but boiling more oceans to find a vuln he'd already found

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I swear I’m gonna plug an LLM into a rather traditional solver I’m writing. I may tuck deep into the paper a point how it’s quite slow to use an LLM to mutate solutions in a genetic algorithm or a swarm solver. And in any case non LLM would be default.

    Normally I wouldn’t sink that low but I got mouths to feed, and frankly, fuck it, they can persist in this madness for much longer than I can stay solvent.

    This is as if there was a mass delusion that a pseudorandom number generator can serve as an oracle, predicting the future. Doing any kind of Monte Carlo simulation of something like weather in that world would of course confirm all the dumb shit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] [S] 8 points 1 year ago

    While I dislike further proliferation of the AI idiocy, I have mouths to feed too, and I've definitely seen that strategy work. Good luck and god speed.

    My workplace has started using multiple new software/systems over the past few years that advertised heavily on their AI features automating away a bunch of the grunt work of running say, a NOC monitoring solution.

    Then we got hands on with the thing and learned that the automation was all various "normal" algorithms and automation, and there was like two optional features where you could have an AI analyze data and try to analyze trends instead of using the actual statiscal algorithms it would use by default. Even the sales people running our interactive demos steered us clear of the AI stuff. We cared that it made things easier for us, not the specifics of how, so it was all roses.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent