I think for any one of those bugs there might simply be half a dozen footguns or bugs that once it's spelled out you wonder how anyone let it slide.

I think that's the case where LLMs might indentify most.

It's challenging though as the current AI audits produce so many false positives it's hard to know when it's being pedantic or when it's genuinely caught a human being a bone head

[0]: Be they human or LLM. Or an entity with any proportion of the two. I do not judge nor discriminate.

Edit: Sure, a small minority presumably run sshd under these conditions. But a small minority times the number of Alpine containers still gets to a large absolute number with a trivial exploit. It's bad.

Edit 2: You really don't need to look very hard to find public container examples at million-download scale.

I will activate one for people to play around with:

    sftp hn@ping.altchan.org

[1] https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/commit/?id=b3c4cc121f70f...

I don't know about this specific case but in general? Yes, totally. No one is going to fix all existing software that depends on libs behaving exactly as glibc, you have to accept some trade-offs. Either your new implementation stops being perfectly simple and clean, or no one uses it.

You can use \ to escape formatting.

Anticapitalism.