Technology

39308 readers

393 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

ChatGPT's o3 Model Found Remote Zeroday in Linux Kernel Code (linuxiac.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

I hate AI. Why?

Because of its extreme energy consumption compared to what it achieves
Because it is all in the hands of the worst companies on this planet
Because capitalists are foaming at the mouth to use it to fuck over workers
Because it is devaluing art and reducing it to another commodity to "produce"

However

I also took the time to read the original blog post, and it is a fascinating story.

The author starts out with using an existing vulnerability as a benchmark for ChatGPT testing. They describe how they took the code specific to the vulnerability and packaged it for ChatGPT, how they formatted the query and what their results were. In 100 runs only 8 correctly identify the targeted vulnerability, the rest are false positives or claim that there are no vulnerabilities in the given code.

Then they take their test a step further and increase the amount of code shared with ChatGPT so that it also includes stuff of the module that had nothing to do with the original vulnerability. As expected, this larger input decreases performance and also reduces the vulnerability detection rate for the targeted vulnerability. However, in those 100 runs, another vulnerability was described that wasn't a false positive. An actual new vulnerability that the author didn't know about was discovered. Again, the signal to noise ratio is very low, and one has to sift through a lot of wrong reports to get a realistic one, but this proved that it could be used as a useful tool for helping to detect vulnerabilities.

I highly recommend reading the blog post.

As much as I like to be critical about AI, it doesn't help if we put our heads in the sand and act as if it never does something cool.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Interesting. I feel like the headline is still bad though. I get why they ran with it, at least — "ChatGPT finds kernel exploit" is more interesting and gets more clicks than "Monkey finally writes Shakespeare."

but this proved that it could be used as a useful tool for helping to detect vulnerabilities.

I think "could" is doing some heavy lifting there.

load more comments (4 replies)