2 ms·

I guess. The IPv4 address space is small enough that it's been feasible to scan the entire thing exhaustively for a while now. Before LLMs, a public IPv4 would

I guess. The IPv4 address space is small enough that it's been feasible to scan the entire thing exhaustively for a while now. Before LLMs, a public IPv4 would mostly get automated scripts that try the same things on every address, sometimes depending on what port scans find, yes. But we're going to start seeing more adversaries that have LLMs investigate each individual address to find novel or unique vulnerabilities. You can spray individualized reverse engineering without having to dedicate a real reverse engineer's time to each target. Avoiding the attention of attackers won't be enough to get away with mere security by obscurity.

tancop 6d ago
You can use the same RE tools and run your own agents as a defender. Everything they find helps you harden your setup, to the point there might be no exploitable vulns at all after a couple days of intense red teaming. It's not completely bulletproof (unless you do formal verification, another thing LLMs are good at) but the network boundary stops a lot of attack vectors. You can't really do side channel or timing attacks over IP, so all that's left are easier to patch logic bugs.
- LoganDark 6d ago
  > You can't really do side channel or timing attacks over IP Ehh, this has been disproven dozens of times but that's besides the point, I think. I absolutely agree that defenders should be using every tool at their disposal to harden their infrastructure. A lot of defenders simply don't do that, and that's always been a shame. I truly hope that this increasing threat leads to better defensive effort. People need to realize they can't just get away with it the same as before.