153 points pseudolus 1 hour ago 62 comments
LoboxPlatform 47 minutes ago | parent
For businesses, this is a reminder that cybersecurity cannot be treated as a one-time task. Regular updates, security audits, and responsible maintenance matter just as much as adopting new technology.
As professional communities become more connected, sharing technical knowledge and learning from security experts will become increasingly valuable. That's also why platforms like Lobox focus on bringing professionals together to exchange knowledge, build connections, and discover relevant communities.
The bigger question is: are organisations investing enough in fixing their existing technical debt before adopting more AI-powered systems?
LoganDark 41 minutes ago | parent
Keep in mind that every PHP application globally was advised to completely cut network access or entirely shut down until the patch was available, so this was global critical infrastructure failure. I'm surprised lives weren't lost as a result.
And no, from what I've seen, it had nothing to do with the few entities that did rightly ignore the embargo after the exploit was already being circulated, even though the PHP devs are seemingly still putting resources into spinning it that way.
I'm sure the defender community will eventually come up with a way to patch security vulnerabilities just about as fast as they can be discovered and exploited.
sva_ 46 minutes ago | parent
Arbortheus 42 minutes ago | parent
It’s frustrating to have all these 0days and CVEs to patch for now, but in the long run perhaps we’ll leave with more robust software.
octoberfranklin 32 minutes ago | parent
NSA spent 20 years stockpiling vulns and pushing the industry towards half-assed solutions like address sanitization and pointer tagging when they could have put the industry on memory-safe languages instead.
They managed to get the IME/PSP/TrustZone into 99% of the CPUs out there by mandating it for government purchases; they could have done the same thing with memory-safe languages. But instead they chose to stockpile vulns. Hope they burn in hell for this.
FartyMcFarter 27 minutes ago | parent
Even if they wanted to, I highly doubt they could push the industry to do that. The industry does what it wants to do, and rewriting tons of software was far from its priorities. There were no LLMs back then to help with such a massive migration.
There's also the fact that rewriting software tends to introduce a lot of new bugs.
lambdaone 17 minutes ago | parent
terminalcommand 13 minutes ago | parent
Memory safe languages are not a silver bullet either.
bluGill 9 minutes ago | parent
elcritch 6 minutes ago | parent
aa-jv 10 minutes ago | parent
Yeah, about that. Its the biggest vulnerability in the industry. Nobody wants to confront this fact, though.
Too much profit to be made in subversion and human rights abuses.
jareklupinski 42 minutes ago | parent
my webserver never needed a million lines of code just to pass bytes to other people
getfacl 42 minutes ago | parent
sevenzero 41 minutes ago | parent
amelius 39 minutes ago | parent
Kevin_Flynn 38 minutes ago | parent
So, the headline should read,
"AI is helping us eliminate 40 years of technical debt."
Since AI found the bug, and probably also generated the patch at this point.
An abundance of solutions is a problem for people who sell solutions.
bearjaws 37 minutes ago | parent
I fear it's only going to get worse.
Lucasoato 37 minutes ago | parent
Yes, AI developed code might have vulnerabilities or bugs, but so already has your JSP based web server that has Oracle and God knows what else among dependencies.
amelius 36 minutes ago | parent
poelzi 33 minutes ago | parent
My approach is https://tix.im/ - not launched yet. But from expedience: modeling everything as workflows of composeable nix flakes (expert systems from programs, skills, agents, workflows and their snippets, DBs blobs, service descriptions, ...) and then run everything in highly isolated environments. It is not only so much more efficient, reduces errors, increases quality, reduces unnecessary cognitive load, ...
I start to move more and more daily tasks into the systems. Even UI programs become interactive workflow steps, which allow me to attach from anywhere back to a task in an environment optimized for the task.
Dependency updates for example, a workflow. A subgraph from a security scanner expert checks each change in the dependency tree.
sevenzero 27 minutes ago | parent
>But from expedience: modeling everything as workflows
No thanks. I like private computing. I like all the fun stuff you can do with Computers. I'll never want agent based computers.
hatefulmoron 8 minutes ago | parent
vanschelven 31 minutes ago | parent
stevefan1999 28 minutes ago | parent
simias 26 minutes ago | parent
Everybody in the industry knows that we've been building on quicksand. Moore's law meant that we could just sacrifice performance and add a dozen layer on top of technology from the 90s (if not older) and keep the thing chugging along.
Look at the PHP situation:
- HTTP is an old and quirky protocol with a lot of surface open for attackers that are rarely useful nowadays and might be better left off to higher layers. But of course, we can't break compat, so everybody still implements all the naughty parts, just in case.
- PHP was a joke language from the start, we were making fun of it in the early 2000s, the fact that over 20 years later it still powers a huge chunk of the web is enough to demonstrate that we're not serious people. Cue the PHP fans telling me that "it's good now". Maybe, I don't really care, the effort that went into making it good should have gone into ditching PHP for a better language 20 years ago. The bandaid mentality is what got us in this situation.
- And of course to add insult to injury, PHP, this security-critical language, is still implemented in garbo C using things like setjmp/longjmp. Just to make sure to absolutely maximize the damage if a vuln is discovered, I suppose. Brilliant.
- Oh and all of this is still running overwhelmingly on top of x86 which is its own bag of legacy garbage. "No but you don't get it, modern CPUs are really more like RISC CPUs, the RISC ISA is translated internally" yeah exactly that's my point let's stop doing things like that.
We're a clown industry. We only made it this far because, usually, buggy code doesn't kill people and we can iterate and patch things quickly. We never had to do things correctly, we could flourish with abysmal levels of quality acceptance. This may not be true anymore.
Of course the reason things are done this way is generally to maintain backward compatibility and make transition easier. At least now that we have LLMs this excuse will hopefully vanish: porting even huge codebases to a new language/framework, something that was a tremendous undertaking mere months ago, is now vastly easier and faster. We can leave the 1990s behind us.
sevenzero 19 minutes ago | parent
It's totally the devs fault and not the environments devs have to work in. Deadlines forced down on you until you have to make compromises, 24/7 having to compete with people who actually don't care because you have to meet months end payments somehow. Whole businesses blinded by a tech gold rush.
>We're a clown industry.
I do agree here, but that includes every non dev person.
bonoboTP 10 minutes ago | parent
NostraDavid 17 minutes ago | parent
I'll generally agree, and I include myself in this industry, but we've simply have been bound by compatibility. I don't think anyone chose intentionally to keep the crap around; it was simply never worth it to pay the "break compatibility" cost, until now.
traceroute66 16 minutes ago | parent
First, I am not a PHP fan, but I will absolutely stick up for the "its good now".
Yes, absolutely no debate the old PHP 4.x/5.x was shocking. However to give PHP their due, they absolutely did make serious efforts in 7.x/8.x. They deserve due recognition for that.
Unfortunately lots of people – I'm guessing you're one of them – still have battle-scars from 4.x/5.x and they think (incorrectly) that 7.x/8.x is "more of the same".
Second "joke language", well, cast your mind back to what else was available at the time... ColdFusion, CGI, ASPX ... it was not exactly a beautiful world back then.
Sure, to borrow your terminology, the Java fans will be along soon to tell us all how awesome Java is for the web. But many of us still bear battle-scars of the horrors of Java stacktraces, messing around with incomprehensible XML config files, Java's penchant for eating RAM for breakfast, and generally trying to figure out why the hell Tomcat is not working (again !).
hansvm 14 minutes ago | parent
traceroute66 11 minutes ago | parent
I suspect the only thing that's changed is that Oracle now charge you for the pleasure. ;)
More seriously though, its been a long time since I've touched Java, but I suspect the only thing that's changed is that its all hidden in magical kubernetes containers these days.
DocTomoe 8 minutes ago | parent
hansvm 16 minutes ago | parent
It's especially fun when not implementing the naughty bits is its own source of vulns. Your code is simpler and less prone to RCE, but your proxy mishandling or whatever allows for credential smuggling attacks, identity spoofing, request smuggling, cache poisoning, and all the normal issues at the application layer.
eastbound 15 minutes ago | parent
lambdaone 15 minutes ago | parent
Absolutely. The industry could have moved towards safer languages, better coding methodology and formal verification years ago (see for example MISRA C as at least a partial movement in this direction). It didn't, because it was cheaper not to.
bonoboTP 12 minutes ago | parent
Trying to understand underlying reasons and incentive structures is much more productive and useful than simply venting about the worse moral character and seriousness of people in one industry vs the next. Curiously, the grass seems always greener - when you ask people in other industries, you'll often hear endless complaints about the state of things there too.
daveguy 25 minutes ago | parent
program_whiz 23 minutes ago | parent
All those "paying down" technical debt with AI, I would advise reading the code _very_ carefully. Sometimes the "solution" which passes some test or adheres to some described functionality is incredibly narrow / brittle, and/or has failure cases that are non-obvious.
Yes I'm using $latest_model on high, its still not there. Unless your threshold for "fixed" is "the 1M line lean proof runs, we don't know how it works", it still requires a lot of attention, hand-holding, and scrutiny, especially when fixing issues / working around failures (where it tends to shortcut or invent workarounds).
herval 22 minutes ago | parent
bemtevi 21 minutes ago | parent
Izmaki 6 minutes ago | parent
Izmaki 9 minutes ago | parent
We, too, have to adjust to this change, this new abstraction layer, because whether we like it or not, the code an LLM will produce in no more than five years will arguably be much, much better than the code any 10x developer could produce even if given months of time and an infinite supply of caffeine.
We "just" need to find a way to confirm that our work in this new abstraction layer - primarily prompt engineering - results in the code functionality that we had in mind, not necessarily the code implementation that we had in mind.
contravariant 4 minutes ago | parent
malka1986 21 minutes ago | parent
mawadev 19 minutes ago | parent
Just consider how laughable some working conditions in software are and then come to realize how architecture is shaped by the organization communication patterns and not reality. You will see it in a different light then.
eecc 15 minutes ago | parent
Well now, Great Responsibles, it's clear you too were out of your collective depth and were all paying for your smug hubris. Perhaps take a bite out of that humble pie you've obviously never tasted?
swatcoder 15 minutes ago | parent
It totally feels like the former if you watch it find and fix vulnerabilities or other debt-tasks one after another.
But only so many of these "technical debt" issue are little off-by-one errors that get remedied by a surgically narrow patch.
Many enough require some kind of restructuring or redevelopment of their own and it's going to take time to figure out if AI faces the same dilemma as human developers: where each non-trivial change carries the risk of some new issue, ad infinitum.
If that happens to be the case, and AI isn't able to magically produce perfect software in finite time, then what's really happened is that the threat of hostile AI exploiting our technical debt will force us to always be burning and churning code just to remain a moving target.
It's another "we'll see" thing for now, I think.
intrasight 8 minutes ago | parent
m000 11 minutes ago | parent
xbmcuser 8 minutes ago | parent