DrWhax@drwhax@infosec.exchange

I know Mastodon hates LLM's and AI. So here goes!

I recently got access to trusted access of cyber capabilities of both openai and anthropic, which also allows you to weaponize security vulnerabilities.

The speed at which these parrots can find bugs and be creative enough to exploit them is staggering.

I recently pointed an LLM at an kernel fix that was reachable by an unprivileged namespace on Debian and it fully weaponized it, without too much me prompting it in the right direction, in about 7-9 hours.

I don't think open-source and companies will know what's coming for them once these open-source weight models will have broader reach and get better at exploiting vulnerabilities on a massive scale as anyone can access them.

The bottom line I think is, you cannot patch faster than the attackers can easily chain all kinds of vulnerabilities together and just move laterally on an incredibly fast pace.

I've started reporting vulnerabilities to all kinds of projects and the majority have trouble or patching issues found. There's not enough maintainers, or there's simply none anymore.

I've been getting quite worried about what our future will look like for data privacy. I think outright not running an LLM over your codebase to find critical security vulnerabilities because of your moral stance will keep us more insecure.

Please run an LLM over your code base if it's internet facing or something critical, we thank you!

Can't wait for the discussions on this!

Crystal@MossyQuartz@vivaldi.net

Replying to @⁨drwhax@infosec.exchange⁩

@drwhax
I'm glad you've invited discussions on this, because my immediate thoughts and questions diverge from the discussion I'm primarily seeing here. When you mention vulnerabilities, yes you mention they exist in code as well as in projects. When I think of vulnerabilities, I think of the method I am using to make and maintain a record of something or else to achieve a goal or state of physical safety. For example, if my household accounting spreadsheets and forecasts are handwritten then the vulnerability is risk of loss if the dog eats them, but risk is mitigated when I keep an offline digital file. When a family member starts a small business, I ask the questions learnt in my accounting and auditing classes because I believe the risks involved include thinking about how to prevent losses of whatever is important. I only had a couple of BASIC programming classes in 1984, but it seemed to me that in those days the instructor felt we should understand the process so that we could consider risks. I now wonder if the machine-assisted searching allows you to consider the assorted practical situations of each business whose vulnerabilities are being sought.

en
Crystal@MossyQuartz@vivaldi.net

Replying to @⁨drwhax@infosec.exchange⁩

@drwhax Computer vulnerabilities, alright that's fair. When I took the Computerized Accounting class in 1985, students were told the business should continue the manual accounting methods concurrent with the new processes for two years, or more, because certain daily functions could look alright while other annual functions might not be obvious until after the annual reports are printed and reviewed. That was how us old people were taught about computers, they said the data needed to be confirmed as accurate before we could trust it.