3 ms·
The logic is Defense in Depth. Even if the "cage" code is AI-written and imperfect, it still creates a barrier. The probability of AI accidentally writing malic
by KurSix 9mo ago
The logic is Defense in Depth. Even if the "cage" code is AI-written and imperfect, it still creates a barrier. The probability of AI accidentally writing malicious code is high. The probability of it accidentally writing code that bypasses the imperfect protection it wrote itself is much lower
- snowmobile 9mo agoDefense in depth doesn't mean throwing a die twice and hoping you don't get snake eyes. The AI-generated docs claim that the AI-generated code only filters specific actions, so even if it manages to do that correctly it's not a lot of protection.
- solumunus 9mo ago> The probability of AI accidentally writing malicious code is high. Is it though? We’ve seen a lot of output at this point and it does not strike me as high…
- KurSix 9mo agoI should clarify, not "malicious" in the sense of "wants to hack you", but "dangerous" by nature. AI loves to hallucinate non-existent packages (hello, supply chain attacks), hardcode credentials, or disable SSL verification simply because it makes the code work. It's not evil, it's just competently ignorant, which in a security context is often worse than an overt enemy