7 pointsby AndrewDucker6 hours ago4 comments
  • munk-a6 hours ago
    It would be pleasant to know a bit more about the whole of what was reported. If this system reported 24 potential vulnerabilities of which thirteen were legitimate that's pretty excellent, if it only reported these twelve then that's astounding - but we don't know how many false reports were filtered through either by the OpenSSL team or by the folks running this agent and the primary issue.
  • greesil6 hours ago
    This is a press release masquerading as a blog post.
  • jazz9k5 hours ago
    "Our goal was to turn what used to be an elite, artisanal hacker craft into a repeatable industrial process"

    So putting everyone in the security industry out of work is an admirable goal?

    • palmotea5 hours ago
      > So putting everyone in the security industry out of work is an admirable goal?

      For the capitalist class, yes. The less they have to pay labor, the more money and power they can concentrate in themselves.

      • gruez4 hours ago
        Should we abolish tractors and mechanical looms on the basis that they put farmers and weavers out of work, and only concentrate "money and power" to the "capitalist class"?
        • palmotea4 hours ago
          > Should we abolish tractors and mechanical looms on the basis that they put farmers and weavers out of work, and only concentrate "money and power" to the "capitalist class"?

          If you don't have good jobs (or some equivalent) ready for all the farm workers, sure. Progress should serve everyone, rather than have the costs concentrated on those less able to bear them.

          And you need an actual plan, not just a fallacious hand-wave of, "it'll all work this time, because it worked out in the past." You can't assume history will repeat itself (and you may not even want that: a genocide feels far different to those killed than the survivors, and an economic disruption feels far different to those harmed by it than some kid reading about it 100 years later).

          But if you can't come up with that, I wouldn't mind some law that forbids businesses from owning and operating AI, reserving that exclusively for workers and worker-organizations.

          At some point, automation will mean there won't be any jobs left (at least for most people, and don't hand-wave that away), and AI means we're far closer to that point than we ever have been. Something different will need to happen (though it'll probably a loosening of morals around the value of human life, with billionaire killing off the excess population (us) their kingdoms with vibecoded AI attack drones).

      • LargoLasskhyfv4 hours ago
        I think that is the wrong point of view, to reason about this.

        Consider houses, or old non-cyberized non-networked cars. Once built they work, more or less, with reasonable maintenance.

        The security industry can't be called reasonable maintenance. It's not really their fault, because what they are working with can't be called reasonable either.

        IMO anything which makes this farce explode ASAP is good. Sorry for all the beggars which found their niche in there, but things change sometimes. If your'e so smart, reschool and retool?

    • LargoLasskhyfv4 hours ago
      OFC!
  • 6 hours ago
    undefined