Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • Just like Cryptolocker, this will be the "Finding Out" phase for everyone who has been putting off best practice security.

    But, lets be clear, Best Practice will save you. We can engineer assuming there are zero days in path. Go to your CTO now cap in hand and ask for overlapping controls, wafs, application monitoring, backups and all the other shit you haven't been doing.

    Because when you find out, I will laugh, it will be very very very funny to me.

  • Meanwhile a huge portion of management and leadership in software companies are encouraging everyone to de facto stop looking at code and let the LLM and a bunch of boundaries handle this for you.
  • Mmm, a world where a defender-LLM is essentially required is great news for people selling inference.
  • It's just the same advice as ever: be extremely, exceedingly careful in what you expose to any network. When I set up machines for production, they don't respond to pings and they don't even have an SSH port open without knocking. There are also ways to eschew the need for an SSH port entirely.

    People who never took that seriously will never take this seriously either, and that's their loss. (And loss of the commons, unfortunately.)

    There's just also new advice: you can't afford to expose an unsecured system to the internet even for a moment. Think of those IPv4 address space scanners, except this time any one of them could be capable of developing individualized attacks in mere minutes. They don't sleep, they don't take breaks.

  • That’s fine for your home server, but if you want an actual server that the general public can use, it has to be exposed to the internet.
  • Maybe all these vital infrastructure companies should not have spent the past decades in a race to the bottom of cybersecurity. There is going to be a reckoning.
  • How to secure our identity layers(AuthN & AuthZ)? Let alone the products.
  • The title reads like a Diary of a CEO thumbnail but unlike those discussions this article has a point.

    Impotent slop code on one side and potent automated vulnerability exploitation on the other will lead to fun times.

  • I think we have less time and the only remaining limitation is the actual cost to run such hacking campaigns. It does not appear expensive, but is not free, and there is a LOT of things to scan for vulnerabilities.

    The models are already here, and one can rent a GPU cluster to run such workloads at speed - no need to play with slow local machines. I'd assume one can host the thinking at an unsuspected public cloud provider, proxy the network traffic to some botnet to evade blocking - and the only thing remaining is time and cost.

    I do wonder what tools exist for boring, legitimate companies to try and do the same to their own systems to find the vulnerabilities before the bad guys do. The paradox here is I can't run a de-restricted chinese model with the same tools that hackers are using - but I think enterprises actually HAVE to do it in order to stand a chance in preparing for the onslaught.

  • The point of the local model in the context of the article was to argue that you can't ban these capabilities.

    Making datacenters and public clouds only rent GPUs to a restricted list of people, while tightly monitoring what people do with their bought resources won't help.

  • > This probably sounds like nonsense words or hysterical overreacting to most people, so here's what that means: "GLM" is a kind of LLM (AI) [...]

    The post also sounds like that to people that understand the technology.

    Calling that out like this and trying to pin that assessment to lack of knowledge is not a get-out-of-jail-free card, nor a good move.

    __

    Edit: Having spent some time letting the article marinate in my mind.

    On the defending side, it is written that

    > LLMs are good at writing patches, but not as one-off-prompts.

    But this for me kinda conflicts with what is written on the attacking side:

    > GLM 5.3-flash is so good at those tasks that human involvement in those tasks can be negligible. As a result, we are now in a world where cybersecurity attacks can be run in a for loop.

    What is it? Can it be this autonomous terrifying entity or can it not be?

    Yes, yes, attackers only need to win once, whereas defenders need to win every time, but that's not my point.

  • I don't think we even have a year. The current batch of LLMs are ferociously good at identifying vulnerabilities.
  • Being cautious is a good thing, but these models can also do some good. And if they run with simpler HW, it could allow all sorts of new consumer thingies. I mean, the world will not come to end in the coming year.
  • Even if they are good the vulnerabilities have to be there. There's lots of things turning up like Local Privilege Escalations (LPE) in Linux, but serious people didn't expect the kernel to be a boundary for a sophisticated attacker.

    A lot of the vulnerabilities LLMs are finding now are the "long tail" and affect only particular configurations, I would be surprised if e.g. a widely applicable RCE is found in Linux (but I'm also not going to bet against it).

    Where this gets interesting is the long tail can be used to target a particular system and this is where defense-in-depth becomes important for every organisation.

    by dgl
  • Thankfully we have already made good progress towards things like arm memory tagging and memory safe languages.

    It’s a rocky period right now but the future will be much more secure after all the low hanging fruit are found.

  • I've ran simple prompts such as "Do a in-depth sweep of this (private) repo and find any security flaws" for a few dozen long-running apps and websites that I have access to. Every single one came back with multiple real vulnerabilities within 5 or 10 minutes.
  • Can confirm.

    I work at an e-commerce agency where we work with (among others) Adobe Commerce.

    The number of unauthorized RCE vulnerabilities being reported not only in the core product, but also very popular modules used in the community[1] is going through the roof.

    And we are having a lot of close calls, too; just last weekend, a 0day[2] was widely being exploited at a large scale, before any publication or patch. We have learnt to be on the ball with applying patches and security updates, and even with all that effort, we saw a few projects already being hit by the initial log poisoning. We got lucky that nothing was fully compromised but I am sure that many, many webshops got infected last weekend. And not even a day later there are already other variants of this exploit showing up.

    [1] https://sansec.io/research/amasty-mass-disclosure

    [2] https://sansec.io/research/stylesmuggler-0day

    by hnsr
  • Here's an idea: as a first step, simplify everything, and make sure you're aware how your stack works, and what it imports.

    As an example: WordPress is a horrible thing, but the core has been through so much, that it's suprisingly secure. Then plugins and themes come, and whoosh, the security is gone.

    We need a new KISS: keep it simple, stupid, secure.

  • This is not at all easy though. Most Wordpress users are not software companies. They contract some work out to set it up, maybe some recurring maintenance but they don’t have in house development experience.

    If they have a site existing today built on plugins and a theme, how are they realistically going to simplify this? How would they even know they need to without the site being hacked?

  • > as a first step, simplify everything, and make sure you're aware how your stack works, and what it imports.

    We've been trying that for years but the enthusiasm of developers and the eagerness of their employers fight against it. Worse, with coding LLMs it's now easier than ever to output a lot of code, fast.

    It'll ultimately be up to more experienced developers to salvage these projects. Or not, given that the coding LLMs aren't stopping and will likely get better over time. Either way, we will need experienced people that know what to look out for / know how to instruct LLMs to output secure code and find weaknesses etc.

  • The "surprisingly secure" WordPress just had a unauthenticated RCE earlier this year. Just simplifying isn't going to be enough.

    https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/cve-2026-63030

  • Minimization of 3rd party dependencies has always been a key for risk reduction. Now more than ever before.

    Some stacks make this a lot easier than others. I regret the rules of HN effectively forbid this conversation because it has meaningful technical consequences and isn't purely about ideological flame war.

  • The reason is simple - nothing really bad has happened that we can point at and say "ah, shit, let's all learn collectively". I know it sounds naive when I say it, but there hasn't been a significantly consequential hack, leak, destruction, or anything related to cybersecurity where it led for concerns of people.

    The main thing I can think of is cyber insurance, which requires a bunch of audits, and some checks maybe, and it changes some conditions whenever there's a big explosion. Whenever big leaks happened, data security and etc., nobody really went to jail, so nobody really cares. Everything can be brushed off, because it costs time to implement proper measures and adds friction / barriers in some cases. So in the end, there's a huge pushback against it. And I totally get it, to be honest.

  • > On September 22, Apple is releasing the M5 Mac Studio with 256 GB of unified memory [..] it will probably [..] enough to write this snippet of code in 3 seconds

    The author has obviously never ran an LLM on a mac! In 3 seconds, it will have possibly started to think about maybe scheduling a date to contemplate the planning timeline for processing the second token in your prompt.

    by sho
  • The author put in the numbers, but maybe you didn’t read them.

    45 t/s a second is perfectly respectable especially with no limits and 24/7 uptime with very little power draw on the Studio.

    Luna is at around 100 t/s for comparison, but it’s a worse model than 5.3 Flash

  • The difference is memory bandwidth. The M5 Ultra that's coming out on 22nd September can do 1,200GB/s. The M5 Max you can buy today only has 614GB/s.
  • Zzzzz, we should have gotten security right a few decades ago. But security costs money and isn't a flashy feature to attract new customers, or cuts into your margin if you're a "real" business producing stuff or offering some service. Or whatever the decision makers in Berlin were thinking when they ignored security.

    Yeah, we would still see hacks, but we would see less of them if security wasn't optional.

    Maybe the AI craze helps by forcing more decision makes to see security as imperative, and by giving us another powerful tool for our tool box.

    N.b.: I work in the security industry, our customers obviously want to improve their security. We've been seeing an uptick in awareness, but that's mostly due to NIS2 and other legislative efforts. Those force them to do something. AI is a curiosity for small talk to many of them.